Methods to address functional unblinding of raters in CNS trials.

IF 5.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Translational Psychiatry Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1038/s41398-025-03262-1
Steven D Targum, William P Horan, Vicki G Davis, Alan Breier, Stephen K Brannan
{"title":"Methods to address functional unblinding of raters in CNS trials.","authors":"Steven D Targum, William P Horan, Vicki G Davis, Alan Breier, Stephen K Brannan","doi":"10.1038/s41398-025-03262-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) associated with the unique properties of a pharmaceutical product may functionally unblind clinician ratings, obscure true medication effects, and affect confidence about clinical trial results. Central nervous system studies are particularly susceptible to functional unblinding because they rely on relatively subjective symptom assessments. Two different methods were used to examine possible functional unblinding in pooled data from three recent five-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of xanomeline and trospium chloride (formerly known as KarXT) in participants with schizophrenia experiencing acute psychosis. Xanomeline/trospium is an M<sub>1</sub>/M<sub>4</sub> muscarinic receptor agonist that may produce cholinergic side effects. First, we compared the scores of remote (site-independent) raters, blinded to TEAEs, who listened to audio recorded, site-based Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) interviews. Second, we conducted a post hoc analysis of participant subgroups with or without reported cholinergic-related TEAEs to ascertain whether cholinergic TEAEs influenced trial outcome. Remote ratings closely replicated 575 available \"paired\" site-based PANSS total scores at baseline and endpoint (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88 and 0.93, respectively). Both site-based and remote PANSS scores yielded significant improvement favouring xanomeline/trospium over placebo (both p < 0.0001) and yielded significantly greater treatment response (≥30% improvement from baseline) than placebo (both p < 0.0001). The significant improvement of PANSS scores favouring xanomeline/trospium over placebo was comparable in magnitude for all subgroups regardless of whether participants reported cholinergic-related TEAEs, or any TEAEs at all (all p < 0.001). In sum, the two different methods used to assess functional unblinding in these studies found no impact of cholinergic TEAEs, or any TEAEs, on the trial results. These methods may have utility across all clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":23278,"journal":{"name":"Translational Psychiatry","volume":"15 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11805955/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-025-03262-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) associated with the unique properties of a pharmaceutical product may functionally unblind clinician ratings, obscure true medication effects, and affect confidence about clinical trial results. Central nervous system studies are particularly susceptible to functional unblinding because they rely on relatively subjective symptom assessments. Two different methods were used to examine possible functional unblinding in pooled data from three recent five-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of xanomeline and trospium chloride (formerly known as KarXT) in participants with schizophrenia experiencing acute psychosis. Xanomeline/trospium is an M1/M4 muscarinic receptor agonist that may produce cholinergic side effects. First, we compared the scores of remote (site-independent) raters, blinded to TEAEs, who listened to audio recorded, site-based Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) interviews. Second, we conducted a post hoc analysis of participant subgroups with or without reported cholinergic-related TEAEs to ascertain whether cholinergic TEAEs influenced trial outcome. Remote ratings closely replicated 575 available "paired" site-based PANSS total scores at baseline and endpoint (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88 and 0.93, respectively). Both site-based and remote PANSS scores yielded significant improvement favouring xanomeline/trospium over placebo (both p < 0.0001) and yielded significantly greater treatment response (≥30% improvement from baseline) than placebo (both p < 0.0001). The significant improvement of PANSS scores favouring xanomeline/trospium over placebo was comparable in magnitude for all subgroups regardless of whether participants reported cholinergic-related TEAEs, or any TEAEs at all (all p < 0.001). In sum, the two different methods used to assess functional unblinding in these studies found no impact of cholinergic TEAEs, or any TEAEs, on the trial results. These methods may have utility across all clinical trials.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
484
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychiatry has suffered tremendously by the limited translational pipeline. Nobel laureate Julius Axelrod''s discovery in 1961 of monoamine reuptake by pre-synaptic neurons still forms the basis of contemporary antidepressant treatment. There is a grievous gap between the explosion of knowledge in neuroscience and conceptually novel treatments for our patients. Translational Psychiatry bridges this gap by fostering and highlighting the pathway from discovery to clinical applications, healthcare and global health. We view translation broadly as the full spectrum of work that marks the pathway from discovery to global health, inclusive. The steps of translation that are within the scope of Translational Psychiatry include (i) fundamental discovery, (ii) bench to bedside, (iii) bedside to clinical applications (clinical trials), (iv) translation to policy and health care guidelines, (v) assessment of health policy and usage, and (vi) global health. All areas of medical research, including — but not restricted to — molecular biology, genetics, pharmacology, imaging and epidemiology are welcome as they contribute to enhance the field of translational psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
Suicidal risk is associated with hyper-connections in the frontal-parietal network in patients with depression. Transcriptomic profiles link corticostriatal microarchitecture to genetics of neurodevelopment and neuropsychiatric risks. Genome data based deep learning identified new genes predicting pharmacological treatment response of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Methods to address functional unblinding of raters in CNS trials. Clinical trials since 2020 of rapid anti-suicidal ideation effects of ketamine and its enantiomers: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1