Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating Safety and efficAcy of MLC901 in post-traUmatic bRAin Injury: the SAMURAI study protocol

Pavel Pilipenko, Anna Andreevna Ivanova, Yulia Vadimovna Kotsiubinskaya, Valery Feigin, Marek Majdan, Vera Naumovna Grigoryeva, Alexey Yevgenievich Khrulev, Pavel Pilipenko, Anna Andreevna Ivanova, Yulia Vadimovna Kotsiubinskaya, Valery Feigin, Marek Majdan, Vera Naumovna Grigoryeva, Alexey Yevgenievich Khrulev

Abstract

Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death in young adults globally and 90% of cases are mild TBI. Treatment to facilitate recovery after TBI is needed. Traditional medicine MLC901 (NeuroAiD II) with neuroprotective and neuroproliferative properties in cellular and animal models of brain injury showed TBI-associated cognitive improvement in mild or moderate TBI.

Methods and analysis: This is a randomised placebo-controlled trial, with 6-month treatment and 9-month follow-up, to determine the safety and efficacy of MLC901 in improving cognitive function in patients with cognitive impairment following mild TBI. This multicentre trial is conducted at the research centres of six hospitals/institutions in Russia. The primary outcome is to determine the effect of MLC901 on complex attention using the CNS Vital Signs (CNS-VS) online neurological test after 6-month treatment in patients receiving MLC901 compared with placebo. Secondary outcomes include other cognitive domains of CNS-VS and Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire. The exploratory endpoints include Quality of Life after Brain Injury, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and evaluation of improved neurological parameters 3 months after treatment completion. In addition, treatment compliance, concomitant therapies and adverse events will be collected. Investigators will use a secured online system for data entry.

Ethics and dissemination: The study has been approved by the ethic committee of Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (No: 58074). The results of this study will be published in a peer-review journal and presented at international conferences as poster presentations.

Trial registration number: NCT04861688.

Keywords: delirium & cognitive disorders; neurological injury; trauma management.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary of study design.

References

    1. Maas AIR, Menon DK, Adelson PD, et al. . Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:987–1048. 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30371-X
    1. Langlois JA, Rutland-Brown W, Wald MM. The epidemiology and impact of traumatic brain injury: a brief overview. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2006;21:375–8. 10.1097/00001199-200609000-00001
    1. Hyder AA, Wunderlich CA, Puvanachandra P, et al. . The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. NeuroRehabilitation 2007;22:341–53. 10.3233/NRE-2007-22502
    1. Feigin VL, Theadom A, Barker-Collo S, et al. . Incidence of traumatic brain injury in New Zealand: a population-based study. Lancet Neurol 2013;12:53–64. 10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70262-4
    1. Halliwell B. Reactive oxygen species and the central nervous system. J Neurochem 1992;59:1609–23. 10.1111/j.1471-4159.1992.tb10990.x
    1. McMahon P, Hricik A, Yue JK, et al. . Symptomatology and functional outcome in mild traumatic brain injury: results from the prospective TRACK-TBI study. J Neurotrauma 2014;31:26–33. 10.1089/neu.2013.2984
    1. Theadom A, Parag V, Dowell T, et al. . Persistent problems 1 year after mild traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal population study in New Zealand. Br J Gen Pract 2016;66:e16–23. 10.3399/bjgp16X683161
    1. Turner RC, VanGilder RL, Naser ZJ, et al. . Elucidating the severity of preclinical traumatic brain injury models: a role for functional assessment? Neurosurgery 2014;74:382–94. discussion 94. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000292
    1. Byrd M, Dixon CE, Lucke-Wold B. Examining the correlation between acute behavioral manifestations of concussion and the underlying pathophysiology of chronic traumatic encephalopathy: a pilot study. J Neurol Psychol 2018;6. 10.13188/2332-3469.1000037. [Epub ahead of print: 11 05 2018].
    1. Turner RC, Lucke-Wold BP, Logsdon AF, et al. . The quest to model chronic traumatic encephalopathy: a multiple model and injury paradigm experience. Front Neurol 2015;6:222. 10.3389/fneur.2015.00222
    1. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol 2008;63:272–87. 10.1002/ana.21393
    1. Iverson GL. Outcome from mild traumatic brain injury. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2005;18:301–17. 10.1097/
    1. Lannsjö M, af Geijerstam J-L, Johansson U, et al. . Prevalence and structure of symptoms at 3 months after mild traumatic brain injury in a national cohort. Brain Inj 2009;23:213–9. 10.1080/02699050902748356
    1. Zumstein MA, Moser M, Mottini M, et al. . Long-Term outcome in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: a prospective observational study. J Trauma 2011;71:120–7. 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181f2d670
    1. Chen C, Venketasubramanian N, Gan RN, et al. . Danqi Piantang Jiaonang (DJ), a traditional Chinese medicine, in poststroke recovery. Stroke 2009;40:859–63. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.531616
    1. Heurteaux C, Gandin C, Borsotto M, et al. . Neuroprotective and neuroproliferative activities of NeuroAid (MLC601, MLC901), a Chinese medicine, in vitro and in vivo. Neuropharmacology 2010;58:987–1001. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2010.01.001
    1. Quintard H, Borsotto M, Veyssiere J, et al. . MLC901, a traditional Chinese medicine protects the brain against global ischemia. Neuropharmacology 2011;61:622–31. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2011.05.003
    1. Quintard H, Lorivel T, Gandin C, et al. . MLC901, a traditional Chinese medicine induces neuroprotective and neuroregenerative benefits after traumatic brain injury in rats. Neuroscience 2014;277:72–86. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2014.06.047
    1. Tsai M-C, Chang C-P, Peng S-W, et al. . Therapeutic efficacy of neuro AiD™ (MLC 601), a traditional Chinese medicine, in experimental traumatic brain injury. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol 2015;10:45–54. 10.1007/s11481-014-9570-0
    1. Gan R, Lambert C, Lianting J, et al. . Danqi Piantan Jiaonang does not modify hemostasis, hematology, and biochemistry in normal subjects and stroke patients. Cerebrovasc Dis 2008;25:450–6. 10.1159/000126919
    1. Young SHY, Zhao Y, Koh A, et al. . Safety profile of MLC601 (Neuroaid) in acute ischemic stroke patients: a Singaporean substudy of the Chinese medicine neuroaid efficacy on stroke recovery study. Cerebrovasc Dis 2010;30:1–6. 10.1159/000313398
    1. Kong KH, Wee SK, Ng CY, et al. . A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II pilot study to investigate the potential efficacy of the traditional Chinese medicine Neuroaid (MLC 601) in enhancing recovery after stroke (TIERS). Cerebrovasc Dis 2009;28:514–21. 10.1159/000247001
    1. Harandi AA, Abolfazli R, Hatemian A, et al. . Safety and efficacy of MLC601 in Iranian patients after stroke: a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Stroke Res Treat 2011;2011:1–5. 10.4061/2011/721613
    1. Kaishibayev S, et al. . Efficacy of NeuroAiD (MLC901) in combination therapy during early rehabilitation period of patients who had suffered an ischemic stroke.
    1. Murie-Fernández M, Marzo MM. Predictors of neurological and functional recovery in patients with moderate to severe ischemic stroke: the EPICA study. Stroke Res Treat 2020;2020:1–13. 10.1155/2020/1419720
    1. Theadom A, Barker-Collo S, Jones KM, et al. . MLC901 (NeuroAiD II™) for cognition after traumatic brain injury: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Eur J Neurol 2018;25:1055–82. 10.1111/ene.13653
    1. Hossein Pakdaman AAH, Esfandani A, Yousefi A. MLC901 for moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: pilot, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Open Access Journal of Complementary & Alternative Medicine 2020;2:257–62.
    1. Fauzi AA, Prihastomo KT, Ranuh IGMAR, Ranuh I, et al. . Clinical Outcomes of MLC601 (NeuroAiDTM) in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Pilot Study. Brain Sci 2020;10. 10.3390/brainsci10020060. [Epub ahead of print: 21 01 2020].
    1. Siddiqui FJ, Venketasubramanian N, Chan ES-Y, et al. . Efficacy and safety of MLC601 (NeuroAiD®), a traditional Chinese medicine, in poststroke recovery: a systematic review. Cerebrovasc Dis 2013;35 Suppl 1:8–17. 10.1159/000346231
    1. Ghandehari K IMZ, Ebrahimzadeh S, Picard D. NeuroAid (MLC601) versus piracetam in the recovery of post-infarct homonymous hemianopsia. Neural Regeneration Research 2011;6:418–22. 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5374.2011.06.003
    1. Bavarsad Shahripour R, Shamsaei G, Pakdaman H, et al. . The effect of NeuroAiD™ (MLC601) on cerebral blood flow velocity in subjects' post brain infarct in the middle cerebral artery territory. Eur J Intern Med 2011;22:509–13. 10.1016/j.ejim.2011.01.002
    1. Venketasubramanian N, Chen CLH, Gan RN, et al. . A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter study to investigate Chinese medicine Neuroaid efficacy on stroke recovery (ChIMES study). Int J Stroke 2009;4:54–60. 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2009.00237.x
    1. Chen CLH, Young SHY, Gan HH, et al. . Chinese medicine neuroaid efficacy on stroke recovery: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. Stroke 2013;44:2093–100. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002055
    1. Navarro JC, Gan HH, Lao AY, et al. . Baseline characteristics and treatment response of patients from the Philippines in the ChIMES study. Int J Stroke 2014;9 Suppl A100:102–5. 10.1111/ijs.12324
    1. Chankrachang S, Navarro JC, de Silva DA, et al. . Prognostic factors and treatment effect in the ChIMES study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2015;24:823–7. 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.11.017
    1. Chen CLH, Venketasubramanian N, Lee CF, et al. . Effects of MLC601 on early vascular events in patients after stroke: the ChIMES study. Stroke 2013;44:3580–3. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003226
    1. Venketasubramanian N, Young SH, Tay SS, et al. . CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke Recovery - Extension Study (CHIMES-E): A Multicenter Study of Long-Term Efficacy. Cerebrovasc Dis 2015;39:309–18. 10.1159/000382082
    1. Navarro JC, Molina MC, Baroque Ii AC, et al. . The use of NeuroAiD (MLC601) in postischemic stroke patients. Rehabil Res Pract 2012;2012:1–5. 10.1155/2012/506387
    1. Siow CHC. Neuroaid in stroke recovery. Eur Neurol 2008;60:264–6. 10.1159/000155220
    1. Bavarsad Shahripour R, Hemati A, Hosseinzadeh Maleki A. A randomized trial to assess the long-term safety of NeuroAiD among Caucasian patients with acute ischemic stroke. Chin J Integr Med 2014;20:812–7. 10.1007/s11655-014-1687-8
    1. Gualtieri CT, Johnson LG. Reliability and validity of a computerized neurocognitive test battery, CNS vital signs. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2006;21:623–43. 10.1016/j.acn.2006.05.007
    1. Gualtieri CT, Johnson LG. A computerized test battery sensitive to mild and severe brain injury. Medscape J Med 2008;10:90.
    1. Gualtieri CT, Johnson LG, Benedict KB. Psychometric and clinical properties of a new, computerized neurocognitive assessment battery. Bal Harbor, FL: American Neuropsychiatric Association Annual Meeting, 2004.
    1. Papathanasiou A, Messinis L, Georgiou VL, et al. . Cognitive impairment in relapsing remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis patients: efficacy of a computerized cognitive screening battery. ISRN Neurol 2014;2014:1–7. 10.1155/2014/151379
    1. Eyres S, Carey A, Gilworth G, et al. . Construct validity and reliability of the Rivermead Post-Concussion symptoms questionnaire. Clin Rehabil 2005;19:878–87. 10.1191/0269215505cr905oa
    1. King NS, Crawford S, Wenden FJ, et al. . The Rivermead post concussion symptoms questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. J Neurol 1995;242:587–92. 10.1007/BF00868811
    1. von Steinbüchel N, Wilson L, Gibbons H, et al. . Quality of life after brain injury (QOLIBRI): scale validity and correlates of quality of life. J Neurotrauma 2010;27:1157–65. 10.1089/neu.2009.1077
    1. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70. 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x
    1. Herrmann C. International experiences with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale--a review of validation data and clinical results. J Psychosom Res 1997;42:17–41. 10.1016/S0022-3999(96)00216-4
    1. Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, et al. . The validity of the hospital anxiety and depression scale. An updated literature review. J Psychosom Res 2002;52:69–77. 10.1016/s0022-3999(01)00296-3

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit