Suppr超能文献

脱氢表雄酮(DHEA)对比安慰剂治疗干燥综合征的临床试验

Pilot clinical trial of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) versus placebo for Sjögren's syndrome.

作者信息

Pillemer Stanley R, Brennan Michael T, Sankar Vidya, Leakan Rose Anne, Smith Janine A, Grisius Margaret, Ligier Sophie, Radfar Lida, Kok Marc R, Kingman Albert, Fox Philip C

机构信息

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, Bethesda, Maryland 28092, USA.

出版信息

Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Aug 15;51(4):601-4. doi: 10.1002/art.20540.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To screen for potential efficacy and assess feasibility and safety of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) as a treatment for Sjögren's syndrome (SS).

METHODS

A 24-week randomized, double-blinded, pilot trial of oral DHEA (200 mg/day) versus placebo was conducted. The primary comparison was to a hypothesized 20% placebo response rate. If 14 consecutive subjects on DHEA did not respond, a Phase III trial would be considered futile. A placebo group of 14 subjects was planned to verify placebo response rate and estimate sample size required for a definitive trial. Response criteria required 20% improvement in at least 2 of 3 domains. Analysis of covariance was used to adjust for baseline differences and for stratified randomization. Outcome measures included visual analog scale questionnaires for dry eye and dry mouth symptoms, lissamine green ocular dye staining and Schirmer I tests, stimulated salivary flow, IgG, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).

RESULTS

Randomization resulted in 14 DHEA and 14 placebo group subjects. At baseline, mean +/- SD for DHEA versus placebo groups were Schirmer I tests 4.5 +/- 4.5 versus 5.4 +/- 6.1 mm/5 minutes; Van Bijsterveld score 5.3 +/- 2.1 versus 5.5 +/- 2.2; unstimulated saliva 0.03 +/- 0.05 versus 0.04 +/- 0.10 ml/minute; IgG 1,699 +/- 749 versus 1,712 +/- 621 g/dl; and ESR 40 +/- 31 versus 44 +/- 28 mm/hour. Apart from changes over the trial in dry mouth symptoms, no significant differences were noted between the DHEA and placebo groups for dry eye symptoms, objective measures of ocular dryness, stimulated salivary flow; IgG, or ESR. Four DHEA and one placebo group patient dropped out because of adverse effects. Although 7 subjects met response criteria in the DHEA group, 5 met the criteria in the placebo group, and there was no significant difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

DHEA showed no evidence of efficacy in SS. Without evidence for efficacy, patients with SS should avoid using unregulated DHEA supplements, since long-term adverse consequences of exposure to this hormone are unknown.

摘要

目的

筛选脱氢表雄酮(DHEA)治疗干燥综合征(SS)的潜在疗效,并评估其可行性和安全性。

方法

开展一项为期24周的随机、双盲、口服DHEA(200毫克/天)与安慰剂对照的试点试验。主要比较对象为假定的20%安慰剂有效率。如果连续14名服用DHEA的受试者无反应,则认为III期试验将徒劳无功。计划设立一个由14名受试者组成的安慰剂组,以验证安慰剂有效率并估计确定性试验所需的样本量。反应标准要求在三个领域中的至少两个领域有20%的改善。采用协方差分析来调整基线差异和分层随机化。结果指标包括用于干眼和口干症状的视觉模拟量表问卷、丽丝胺绿眼染色和Schirmer I试验、刺激唾液流量、IgG以及红细胞沉降率(ESR)。

结果

随机分组后,DHEA组和安慰剂组各有14名受试者。基线时,DHEA组与安慰剂组的平均值±标准差分别为:Schirmer I试验4.5±4.5与5.4±6.1毫米/5分钟;Van Bijsterveld评分5.3±2.1与5.5±2.2;未刺激唾液0.03±0.05与0.04±0.10毫升/分钟;IgG 1699±749与1712±621克/分升;以及ESR 40±31与44±28毫米/小时。除了口干症状在试验过程中有变化外,DHEA组和安慰剂组在干眼症状、眼部干燥客观指标、刺激唾液流量、IgG或ESR方面未发现显著差异。4名DHEA组患者和1名安慰剂组患者因不良反应退出。尽管DHEA组有7名受试者符合反应标准,安慰剂组有5名符合标准,但两组之间无显著差异。

结论

DHEA在SS中未显示出疗效证据。由于缺乏疗效证据,SS患者应避免使用未经监管的DHEA补充剂,因为长期接触这种激素的不良后果尚不清楚。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验