Cargando…
Results of a randomized, prospective, double-dummy, double-blind trial to compare efficacy and safety of a herbal combination containing Tropaeoli majoris herba and Armoraciae rusticanae radix with co-trimoxazole in patients with acute and uncomplicated cystitis
OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate non-inferiority of an herbal combination (horseradish root and nasturtium herb) to an antibiotic (co-trimoxazole) in acute uncomplicated cystitis. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, phase III clinical study, using block randomization...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5359132/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28352615 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S121203 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate non-inferiority of an herbal combination (horseradish root and nasturtium herb) to an antibiotic (co-trimoxazole) in acute uncomplicated cystitis. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, phase III clinical study, using block randomization of 4 blocks (size 2). SETTING: Twenty-six centers in Germany, from May 2011 to June 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (median age, 38.5 years; 90% female) with acute uncomplicated cystitis confirmed via urinalysis and bacterial counts. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received the herbal combination (five tablets, four times per day) or the antibiotic (two tablets daily) for a period of 7 or 3 days, respectively, followed by a 21-days without drug treatment. Placebos ensured blinding. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was the percentage of responders, expressed as reduction of germ count from >10(5) to <10(3) CFU/mL of pathogens between visit 1 (day 0) and 3 (day 15). Secondary endpoints included change of symptom scores, duration of symptoms, efficacy assessments, relapse frequency, and safety. A sample size of 178 patients per group was estimated. RESULTS: Of the 96 randomized patients (intent-to-treat; 45 in the phytotherapy group, 51 in the antibiotic group), 51 were considered per-protocol patients (22 in the phytotherapy group, 29 in the antibiotic group). Responder rates were 10/22 (45.5%) for the phytotherapy group and 15/29 (51.1%) for the antibiotic group (group difference: −6.27% [95% CI: −33.90%–21.3%]). The study was terminated prematurely due to slow recruitment rates. Non-inferiority could not be assumed by predefined criteria. During the follow-up period, one relapse occurred in each group. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This clinical trial indicates comparable efficacy of the herbal combination and antibiotic, although non-inferiority was not proved. However, the results and lessons learned are important for the planning of future trials. Issues that led to the premature trial discontinuation were considered. |
---|