Studienlage · Detail
Gemischt
GRADE
Hoch
277 Zitate
Stichproben = 337 Pat.
Dauer15 Wochen
KontrollePlacebo
EndpunktNRS
Verblindungdoppelblind
DesignRCT (multizentrisches, doppelblindes, placebokontrolliertes Parallelgruppen-Design)
Cannabinoidkombination
THC:CBD1:1
Applikationoromukosal
Kernaussage
ITT-Analyse zeigte nicht-signifikante Verbesserung; Per-Protocol-Population (79%) zeigte signifikante Überlegenheit von Sativex gegenüber Placebo bei NRS-Score und Responder-Analysen.
Zusammenfassung
n=337 MS-Patienten mit therapieresistenter Spastik; 15-Wochen-DBRCT (multicenter), Sativex vs. Placebo. Per-Protokoll-Population: NRS-Reduktion -1,3 vs. -0,8 Punkte (p=0,035); Responder-Rate (≥30% Verbesserung) 36% vs. 24% (p=0,040). Timed-10-Meter-Gehtest signifikant verbessert (p=0,042); Sativex gut verträglich, Nebenwirkungen überwiegend mild bis moderat.
P
PopulationErwachsene mit MS-bedingter Spastik, unzureichend durch bestehende Antispastika kontrolliert, n=337
I
InterventionSativex (THC:CBD oromukosal), Selbsttitrierung über 15 Wochen
C
KontrollePlacebo (oromukosal)
O
OutcomeITT: nicht-signifikante NRS-Verbesserung zugunsten Sativex; PP-Analyse: NRS-Reduktion −1,3 vs. −0,8 Punkte (p=0,035), Responderrate ≥30% Verbesserung: 36% vs. 24% (p=0,040)
Vertrauen in die Evidenz
Hoch
Höchste von vier GRADE-Stufen, die Effektschätzung ist sehr verlässlich.
Qualitätsprofil
Größe
★★★★★
Verblindung
Doppelblind
Effektstärke
Gemischt
Zitate / Jahr
★★★★★
Autoren
DOI
10.1179/016164109x12590518685660↗
Design: RCT (multizentrisches, doppelblindes, placebokontrolliertes Parallelgruppen-Design)
Teilen
Abstract
Muscle spasticity is common in multiple sclerosis (MS), occurring in more than 60% of patients. To compare Sativex with placebo in relieving symptoms of spasticity due to MS. A 15-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in 337 subjects with MS spasticity not fully relieved with current anti-spasticity therapy. The primary endpoint was a spasticity 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS). Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed a non-significant improvement in NRS score, in favor of Sativex. The per protocol (PP) population (79% of subjects) change in NRS score and responder analyses (> or =30% improvement from baseline) were both significantly superior for Sativex, compared with placebo: -1.3 versus -0.8 points (change from baseline, p=0.035); and 36% versus 24% (responders, p=0.040). These were supported by the time to response (ITT: p=0.068; PP: p=0.025) analyses, carer global impression of change assessment (p=0.013) and timed 10-meter walk (p=0.042). Among the subjects who achieved a > or =30% response in spasticity with Sativex, 98, 94 and 73% reported improvements of 10, 20 and 30%, respectively, at least once during the first 4 weeks of treatment. Sativex was generally well tolerated, with most adverse events reported being mild-to-moderate in severity. The 0-10 NRS and responder PP analyses demonstrated that Sativex treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment-resistant spasticity, in subjects with advanced MS and severe spasticity. The response observed within the first 4 weeks of treatment appears to be a useful aid to prediction of responder/non-responder status.
„Was dem Handeln im Weg steht, wird zum Weg.“