Cargando…
Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour
BACKGROUND: Nonclinical studies indicate that the hormone relaxin is a good candidate for a safe cervical ripening agent that does not cause uterine contractions. METHODS: This Phase II study (conducted November 2, 2005–October 20, 2006) was a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial testi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5011832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27596360 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1046-1 |
_version_ | 1782451901451730944 |
---|---|
author | Weiss, Gerson Teichman, Sam Stewart, Dennis Nader, David Wood, Susan Breining, Peter Unemori, Elaine |
author_facet | Weiss, Gerson Teichman, Sam Stewart, Dennis Nader, David Wood, Susan Breining, Peter Unemori, Elaine |
author_sort | Weiss, Gerson |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Nonclinical studies indicate that the hormone relaxin is a good candidate for a safe cervical ripening agent that does not cause uterine contractions. METHODS: This Phase II study (conducted November 2, 2005–October 20, 2006) was a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial testing 24-h intravenous infusion of serelaxin (recombinant human relaxin) or placebo for cervical ripening in 72 healthy, primiparous women. Eligible subjects had a singleton pregnancy ≥40 weeks, were planned for elective induction, had vertex presentation of the fetus, intact membranes and a Bishop score at screening ≤4. In Part A of the study, safety evaluation of three escalating doses of serelaxin (7.5, 25 or 75 μg/kg/day) or placebo was performed in 22 subjects admitted to the hospital 24 h prior to scheduled induction (n = 7, 4, 4, and 7 subjects, respectively). The highest safe dose from Part A and placebo were then tested in Part B for safety and cervical ripening (n = 25 subjects/arm). Planned randomisation ratio was of 4:2 (serelaxin:placebo) for each dose group in Part A and 1:1 for Part B. For analysis, subjects in Part B were pooled with those receiving the same dose in Part A and all subjects receiving placebo were pooled. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in Bishop score at 6, 12 and 24 h or end of study drug administration. Maternal safety evaluations included adverse events and vital signs through 4 weeks. Fetal assessments included serial heart rate monitoring and nonstress testing. Neonatal assessments included Apgar scores, NICU admissions, and adverse events through 4 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 74 subjects were randomized and 72 were treated. There were no significant differences between the groups receiving the highest safe dose of serelaxin (75 μg/kg/day) and placebo in the primary or secondary efficacy endpoints. Changes from baseline in Bishop score at 24 h were 4.19 ± 1.9 and 3.26 ± 2.26 in the pooled placebo and serelaxin groups, respectively (p = 0.2507). Serelaxin was well tolerated and no anti-serelaxin antibodies were detected in either subjects or neonates. CONCLUSION: Serelaxin infusion at the end of pregnancy was well tolerated but did not advance cervical ripening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00259103 (15 November 2005). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5011832 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50118322016-09-07 Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour Weiss, Gerson Teichman, Sam Stewart, Dennis Nader, David Wood, Susan Breining, Peter Unemori, Elaine BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article BACKGROUND: Nonclinical studies indicate that the hormone relaxin is a good candidate for a safe cervical ripening agent that does not cause uterine contractions. METHODS: This Phase II study (conducted November 2, 2005–October 20, 2006) was a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial testing 24-h intravenous infusion of serelaxin (recombinant human relaxin) or placebo for cervical ripening in 72 healthy, primiparous women. Eligible subjects had a singleton pregnancy ≥40 weeks, were planned for elective induction, had vertex presentation of the fetus, intact membranes and a Bishop score at screening ≤4. In Part A of the study, safety evaluation of three escalating doses of serelaxin (7.5, 25 or 75 μg/kg/day) or placebo was performed in 22 subjects admitted to the hospital 24 h prior to scheduled induction (n = 7, 4, 4, and 7 subjects, respectively). The highest safe dose from Part A and placebo were then tested in Part B for safety and cervical ripening (n = 25 subjects/arm). Planned randomisation ratio was of 4:2 (serelaxin:placebo) for each dose group in Part A and 1:1 for Part B. For analysis, subjects in Part B were pooled with those receiving the same dose in Part A and all subjects receiving placebo were pooled. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in Bishop score at 6, 12 and 24 h or end of study drug administration. Maternal safety evaluations included adverse events and vital signs through 4 weeks. Fetal assessments included serial heart rate monitoring and nonstress testing. Neonatal assessments included Apgar scores, NICU admissions, and adverse events through 4 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 74 subjects were randomized and 72 were treated. There were no significant differences between the groups receiving the highest safe dose of serelaxin (75 μg/kg/day) and placebo in the primary or secondary efficacy endpoints. Changes from baseline in Bishop score at 24 h were 4.19 ± 1.9 and 3.26 ± 2.26 in the pooled placebo and serelaxin groups, respectively (p = 0.2507). Serelaxin was well tolerated and no anti-serelaxin antibodies were detected in either subjects or neonates. CONCLUSION: Serelaxin infusion at the end of pregnancy was well tolerated but did not advance cervical ripening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00259103 (15 November 2005). BioMed Central 2016-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5011832/ /pubmed/27596360 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1046-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Weiss, Gerson Teichman, Sam Stewart, Dennis Nader, David Wood, Susan Breining, Peter Unemori, Elaine Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title | Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title_full | Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title_fullStr | Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title_full_unstemmed | Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title_short | Recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
title_sort | recombinant human relaxin versus placebo for cervical ripening: a double-blind randomised trial in pregnant women scheduled for induction of labour |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5011832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27596360 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1046-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT weissgerson recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT teichmansam recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT stewartdennis recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT naderdavid recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT woodsusan recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT breiningpeter recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour AT unemorielaine recombinanthumanrelaxinversusplaceboforcervicalripeningadoubleblindrandomisedtrialinpregnantwomenscheduledforinductionoflabour |