Nebulised Hypertonic Saline to Decrease Respiratory Exacerbations in Neuromuscular Disease or Neurodisability (SPICE-UP)

October 14, 2024 updated by: Imperial College London

Effectiveness of Nebulised Hypertonic Saline to Decrease Respiratory Exacerbations in People With Neuromuscular Disease or Neurodisability: a Phase 2 Open Label Pilot Study

Research Aim: This study investigates whether a 12-month treatment with hypertonic saline (salty water) can reduce antibiotic use in individuals with neuromuscular disease or cerebral palsy who frequently experience chest infections due to difficulty clearing mucus from their airways.

Methodology: Participants will be randomly assigned to receive nebulised hypertonic saline (7% salt in water) or normal saline (0.9% salt in water). The study is open-label as both participants and researchers are aware of the treatment, necessary due to the differing tastes of the solutions. Two centers, Royal Brompton Hospital in London and Queens Medical Centre in Nottingham, will conduct the research.

Before starting the treatment, participants will undergo various assessments, including questionnaires to measure quality of life and treatment satisfaction, sputum/throat swab collection, lung clearance index, forced oscillation technique, electrical impedance tomography, and lung ultrasound. Once these assessments are completed, participants will take the assigned treatment at home, administered twice daily for 12 months, with monthly follow-ups regarding difficulties and chest infections. After 12 months, the treatment will cease, and participants will repeat the assessments.

Significance: This research will provide valuable insights into the efficacy of nebulised hypertonic saline for individuals with neuromuscular disease or cerebral palsy, potentially aiding both patients and doctors in making informed treatment decisions.

Dissemination: The study's findings will be shared through publication in scientific journals and presentation at conferences.

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

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 Contact

Study Locations

      • London, United Kingdom, SW3 6NP
      • Nottingham, United Kingdom, NG7 2UH
        • Nottingham University Hospitals
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Natalia Galaz Souza
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Andrew Bush, Professor
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Hui-Leng Tan, Dr
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Mathew Hurley, Dr
        • Contact:

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

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of NMD or neurodisablity by a physician independent of the study, on standard criteria.
  • Age 5 years and above, including adults.
  • Must be able to tolerate nebulised 6% hypertonic saline.
  • Must have a history of at least one respiratory exacerbation requiring antibiotic treatment with or without the need for hospitalisation in the 12 months prior to recruitment.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with additional diagnosis, for example, CF, but those with aspiration and/or bronchiectasis secondary to respiratory complications of NMD will be included.
  • Patients who are already prescribed daily HS in any concentration (i.e, 3%, 5%, 6%, 7%) will be excluded, but those who are on daily NS or have HS prescribed as part of their escalation plan (i.e., PRN) will be included.

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

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Treatment
Nebulised 6% Hypertonic saline
nebulised
Placebo Comparator: Control
Nebulised 0.9% normal saline
nebulised

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Course of antibiotics for respiratory infections
Time Frame: from baseline to week 52
Full courses of antibiotics as prescribed for respiratory infections, both oral and intravenous, (excluding prophylactic antibiotic prescriptions). 1 course of antibiotic would be the full treatment for one event of respiratory infection, irrespective of the number of days that the course was prescribed for.
from baseline to week 52

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Lung clearance index
Time Frame: at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
measured by multiple breath washout
at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Forced oscillation technique
Time Frame: at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Respiratory resistance (Rrs)
at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Forced oscillation technique
Time Frame: at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Respiratory reactance (Xrs).
at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Lung ultrasound
Time Frame: at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Global Lung ultrasound score. The global lung ultrasound score (LUS) quantifies lung aeration by translating lung ultrasound patterns into a numerical score across 12 lung regions (six areas on each side of the chest: two ventral regions, two lateral regions, and two posterolateral regions) and summing the results. The aeration pattern observed in each region is scored from 0 to 3 as follows: 0 = A pattern with ≤2 B lines; 1 = >2 separated B lines that cover ≤50% of the pleural line; 2 = B lines that cover >50% of the pleural line; or 3 = lung consolidation. In theory, the global LUS score can range from 0 (normal aeration in all regions) to 36 (severe abnormal aeration in all regions).
at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Electrical Impedance Tomography
Time Frame: at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-based global inhomogeneity index (quantification of homogeneity of the tidal volume distribution). The image matrix in EIT consists of 32 × 32 pixels. Global inhomogeneity (GI) is calculated as the sum of the absolute differences between the median value of tidal variation and every single pixel value, divided by the sum of all impedance values, to normalise the calculated values.The smaller the GI, the more homogeneous the tidal volume is distributed within the ventilated area. A GI of zero represents a perfectly homogeneous distribution of ventilation.
at baseline before and within 2 hours after drug response assessment, and at week 52.
Airway inflammation
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Levels of IL-8 in sputum or throat swab.
baseline and at week 52
Airway inflammation
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Levels of IL-6 in sputum or throat swab.
baseline and at week 52
Airway inflammation
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Levels of TNF-a in sputum or throat swab.
baseline and at week 52
Airway inflammation
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Levels of IL-1b in sputum or throat swab.
baseline and at week 52
Bacterial diversity
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Operational taxonomic unit (OTU) Richness, defined as count of different species/OTUs.
baseline and at week 52
Bacterial diversity
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Pielou's eveness index. Pielou's evenness is an index that measures diversity along with species richness.
baseline and at week 52
Bacterial diversity
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Shannon diversity index. The index takes into account the number of species living in a habitat (richness) and their relative abundance (evenness).
baseline and at week 52
Bacterial diversity
Time Frame: baseline and at week 52
Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index. Examines the abundances of microbes that are shared between two samples, and the number of microbes found in each.
baseline and at week 52
Ease of airway clearance
Time Frame: Once monthly for 52 weeks.
0-10 Visual analogue scale, where 0 is most easy, and 10 is most difficult.
Once monthly for 52 weeks.
Health-related quality of life
Time Frame: At baseline and at week 51.
Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)™. 0-100 scale, where higher scores indicate better HRQOL (Health-Related Quality of Life).
At baseline and at week 51.
Patient and main carer treatment satisfaction
Time Frame: weeks 12, 26, 39 and 51
Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM Version 1.4). Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating higher satisfaction.
weeks 12, 26, 39 and 51
Family impact
Time Frame: Baseline and at week 51.
PedsQL™ Family Impact Module. The scale has five Likert response options, 'never', 'almost never', 'sometimes', 'often' and 'almost always' (corresponding to scores of 100, 75, 50, 25 and 0). Regarding the interpretation of the scale, higher scores indicate better functioning (less negative impact).
Baseline and at week 51.
Health economics
Time Frame: baseline, week 26 and week 51.
Quality-adjusted life years
baseline, week 26 and week 51.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Recruitment rate
Time Frame: 1 year
Number of participants recruited per centre per month.
1 year
Consent rate
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of eligible participants who consented and were randomised.
1 year
Retention rate
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of randomised participants retained with valid primary outcome data.
1 year
Adherence
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Mean percentage of adherence calculated from returned ampoules count
52 weeks
Adherence
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Pick-up rate as the percentage of picked up prescriptions from total prescribed doses
52 weeks
Adherence
Time Frame: 52 weeks
The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS) Score, where each of the 5 items are summed to give a scale score ranging from 5 to 25, where higher scores indicate higher levels of reported adherence.
52 weeks
Compliance with monthly follow-up
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Percentage of compliance with completion of monthly questionnaires.
52 weeks
Success rates of outcome measures
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of participants who provided a sputum sample or throat swab
1 year
Success rates of outcome measures
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of participants who completed acceptable measurements of Lung clearance index
1 year
Success rates of outcome measures
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of participants who completed acceptable measurements of Forced oscillation technique
1 year
Success rates of outcome measures
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of participants who completed acceptable measurements of Lung ulstrasound
1 year
Success rates of outcome measures
Time Frame: 1 year
Percentage of participants who completed acceptable measurements of Electrical impedance tomography
1 year
Time required to complete outcome measures
Time Frame: 2 hours
Time in minutes to complete acceptable measurements of Lung clearance index
2 hours
Time required to complete outcome measures
Time Frame: 2 hours
Time in minutes to complete acceptable measurements of forced oscillation technique
2 hours
Inter-rater reliability of Lung ultrasound analysis
Time Frame: 1 year
Degree of agreement among independent observers using Cohen Kappa. Cohen suggested the Kappa result be interpreted as follows: values ≤ 0 as indicating no agreement and 0.01-0.20 as none to slight, 0.21-0.40 as fair, 0.41- 0.60 as moderate, 0.61-0.80 as substantial, and 0.81-1.00 as almost perfect agreement.
1 year
Inter-rater reliability of Electrical impedance tomography analysis
Time Frame: 1 year
Degree of agreement among independent observers using Cohen Kappa. Cohen suggested the Kappa result be interpreted as follows: values ≤ 0 as indicating no agreement and 0.01-0.20 as none to slight, 0.21-0.40 as fair, 0.41- 0.60 as moderate, 0.61-0.80 as substantial, and 0.81-1.00 as almost perfect agreement.
1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Andrew Bush, Professor, Imperial College London

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 (Estimated)

June 1, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 3, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 10, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

November 18, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 15, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 14, 2024

Last Verified

October 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Data ownership rights will lie with the institution

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Data will become available after all study activities have finished. It will be available for 10 years.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Data ownership rights will lie with the institution

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP
  • ICF
  • CSR

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

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 Cerebral Palsy

Clinical Trials on saline

Subscribe