ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical Bisaitong （鼻塞通） in treating moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis （AR）. MethodsA randomized， positive-controlled， non-inferiority clinical trial design was adopted. Totally， 108 cases of moderate-to-severe AR were randomly divided into Bisaitong group and mometasone furoate group，with 54 cases in each group. The Bisaitong group was treated with Bisaitong smeared at the nasal cavity twice a day， and the mometasone furoate group received inhalation of mometasone furoate nasal spray 100 μg in each nostril， once a day. Both groups were treated for 4 weeks and followed up after additional 4 weeks. Both groups were compared on the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire （RQLQ）， rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score （RTSS）， visual analogue score （VAS） of sneezing， runny nose， nasal itching， nasal congestion degree， days of AR episodes at enrollment， after 2- and 4-week， and at follow-up. The peripheral blood eosinophil （EOS） count and percentage （EOS%）， serum eosinophil cationic protein （ECP）， serum dust mite， dermatophagoides farinae， and cockroach allergen-specific IgE （sIgE） levels were compared between groups at enrollment and after 4-week treatment. Drug overuse rate was calculated， and the safety was evaluated. The analysis of all efficacy outcomes was based on both full analysis set （FAS） and per-protocol set （PPS）. ResultsThe lower limit of the 95% confidence interval for the differences in RQLQ scores were greater than -0.6 measured after 2- and 4-week treatment and at follow-up compared to that measured at the enrollment in both groups， indicating of the Bisaitong group being non-inferior to the mometasone furoate group. There was no statistically significant difference between groups on RTSS score， VAS scores of sneezing， runny nose， nasal itching， nasal congestion degree and days of episodes at all timepoints （P＞0.05）， but each outcome changed significantly over time in both groups （P＜0.01）. The differences between groups in EOS count， EOS%， ECP levels， serum dust mite， dermatophagoides farinae， cockroach sIgE levels， and drug overuse rate were not statistically significant at enrollment and after 4-week treatment （P＞0.05）. Adverse events occurred in eight cases （15.10%） in the Bisaitong group and five cases （9.30%） in the mometasone furoate group， showing no significant difference between groups （P＞0.05）. ConclusionTopical Bisaitong is non-inferior to mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of moderate to severe AR in terms of clinical symptom relief，reduction in the episodes， improvement of quality of life， and sound safety.
ABSTRACT
The appropriate sample size estimation is very important in the design of clinical trials. However, insufficient or inappropriate sample size estimation is still a prominent problem in the currently published acupuncture and moxibustion clinical trials. At present, the superiority test, non-inferiority test and equivalence test have been widely used in acupuncture and moxibustion clinical trials. This article focuses on the application, calculation methods and PASS11 software using of these three hypothesis test types. In view of the problems in the estimation of sample size in acupuncture and moxibustion clinical trials, the particularity of sample size estimation in acupuncture and moxibustion is summarized from the aspects of parameter setting, ratio of intervention group and control group, and multi-group comparison, in order to guide acupuncture clinical researchers to correctly estimate sample size when conducting clinical trials.
Subject(s)
Acupuncture , Acupuncture Therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic , Moxibustion , Sample SizeABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of domestic exenatide injection versus imported exenatide injection in type 2 diabetic patients with inadequate glycemic control on monotherapy or combination therapy of metformin and insulin secretagogues. Methods A multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled, and non-inferiority trial was carried out. A total of 240 subjects were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to add domestic exenatide injection (trial group) or imported exenatide injection (control group) on the background therapies. The primary endpoint of efficacy was HbA1C change from baseline to week 16. The secondary endpoints of efficacy were the proportion of HbA1C0.05). The changes in FPG, 2hPG, 7P-SMBG and body weight from baseline to week 16 were comparable between the two groups (all P>0.05). Moreover, the incidences of hypoglycemia and adverse events were similar between the two groups (both P>0.05). Conclusion In type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled by monotherapy or combination therapy of metformin and insulin secretagogues, the efficacy of cotreatment with domestic exenatide injection is not inferior to that of imported product ones, with a similar safety profile.