Comparison of the Tolerability of Two Formulations of Hypertonic Saline in Cystic Fibrosis Patients

August 9, 2012 updated by: Ospedale Civile Ca' Foncello
The purpose of this study is to compare the tolerability and acceptability of a formulation containing Hypertonic saline 7% (HS) alone and a formulation containing HS and Hyaluronic acid 0.1% in a population of Cystic Fibrosis (CF) patients who already showed poor tolerance to HS.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

40

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Treviso, Italy, 3100
        • Centro Fibrosi Cistica

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

8 years and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis (genotyping and sweat test)
  • > 8 year-old
  • clinically and therapeutically stable disease in the last 30 days;
  • Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) ≥ 50% of predicted value;
  • intolerance (cough, throat irritation, saltiness) to previous administration of 5.8% hypertonic saline solution.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • decrease in FEV1 >15% after first inhalation of hypertonic saline;
  • Burkholderia cepacia infection;
  • infective exacerbation requiring antibiotic treatment in the 15 days preceding enrolment;
  • patient non compliant to standard therapy;
  • Lung transplant;
  • Patient unable to perform reproducible spirometry;
  • Intolerance to β2 bronchodilators;
  • Concurrent enrolment in other clinical trials;
  • Plasmatic creatinine and transaminases more than twice the normal values.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: group A
Administration of Inhalable Hypertonic saline 7% + Hyaluronan 0.1% 5 ml twice a day, after bronchodilator for one month.
Experimental: group B
Administration of Inhalable Hypertonic saline 7% 5 ml twice a day, after bronchodilator for one month.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Comparison of the judgement on global pleasure of the inhalation between the two treatment groups
Time Frame: The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
A judgment on acceptability and global pleasure of the inhalation was weekly reported by patients on a diary, expressed on a 1-10 scale: a score lower than 6 was considered unfavourable.
The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
Comparison of the symptom cough between the two treatment groups
Time Frame: The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
A judgement on the symptom cough, one of the most important causes of HS intolerance and poor compliance to HS treatment, was weekly reported by patients on a diary, as assessed on a scale of four grades (absent, mild, moderate, severe).
The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
Comparison of the sensation of saltiness between the two treatment groups
Time Frame: The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
A judgement on the sensation of saltiness, one of the most important causes of HS intolerance and poor compliance to HS treatment, was weekly reported by patients on a diary, as assessed on a scale of four grades (absent, mild, moderate, severe).
The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
Comparison of the sensation of throat irritation between the two treatment groups
Time Frame: The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.
A judgement on the sensation of throat irritation, one of the most important causes of HS intolerance and poor compliance to HS treatment, was weekly reported by patients on a diary, as assessed on a scale of four grades (absent, mild, moderate, severe).
The outcome measure was assessed at day 1, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment period. For each time-point we operated a comparison between the two groups.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Comparison of Delta FEV1 between the two treatment groups
Time Frame: day 1 and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment

Secondary outcome was the effect on respiratory function. A sequence of spirometries was performed as follows. A spirometry was performed in basal conditions, then 400 ug of salbutamol were administered and spirometry was performed again after 15 minutes. Whitin 30 minutes, the first dose of the randomized formulation was administered for 15 minutes and a third spirometry was performed 30 minutes after the inhalation. This sequence was repeated 4 weeks later, with the administration of the last dose of treatment.

Delta FEV1 was calculated as follows: [(FEV1 after randomized solution inhalation - FEV1 after bronchodilator)/FEV1 after bronchodilator]x 100. Delta FEV1 was the outcome measure used to compare the two groups of treatment both at the first dose of the four-weeks treatment and at the end (last dose)of the four-weeks treatment.

day 1 and day 28 of the four-weeks treatment

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

December 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

September 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 13, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 2, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

August 7, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

August 10, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 9, 2012

Last Verified

February 1, 2009

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Cystic Fibrosis

Clinical Trials on Inhalable Hypertonic saline 7% + Hyaluronan 0.1%

Subscribe