Recombinant Human Growth Hormone During Rehabilitation From Traumatic Brain Injury. (Growth-TBI)
![]() |
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details. |
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00766038 |
Recruitment Status :
Completed
First Posted : October 3, 2008
Results First Posted : November 18, 2019
Last Update Posted : November 18, 2019
|
- Study Details
- Tabular View
- Study Results
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
Tracking Information | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First Submitted Date ICMJE | September 30, 2008 | ||||||
First Posted Date ICMJE | October 3, 2008 | ||||||
Results First Submitted Date ICMJE | January 15, 2019 | ||||||
Results First Posted Date ICMJE | November 18, 2019 | ||||||
Last Update Posted Date | November 18, 2019 | ||||||
Study Start Date ICMJE | September 2008 | ||||||
Actual Primary Completion Date | June 2013 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||||
Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Functional Outcome 6 Months After Injury, as Measured by the Processing Speed Index [ Time Frame: 6 months ] Processing Speed Index ages standardized score. In this scale, higher scores represent better functioning, lower scores represent poorer function.
100 = mean of a normative population. 110 = 1 standard deviation above normal; 90 = 1 standard deviation below normal 120 = 2 standard deviations above normal; 80 = 2 standard deviations below normal
|
||||||
Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Treatment with recombinant human Growth Hormone (rhGH) in the subacute period after TBI results in improved functional outcome 6 months after injury, as measured by the Composite Outcome Score of the TBI Clinical Trials Network . [ Time Frame: 4 years ] | ||||||
Change History | |||||||
Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||||
Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||||
Current Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures | Not Provided | ||||||
Original Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures | Not Provided | ||||||
Descriptive Information | |||||||
Brief Title ICMJE | Recombinant Human Growth Hormone During Rehabilitation From Traumatic Brain Injury. | ||||||
Official Title ICMJE | A Phase II, Randomized Controlled Trial of Recombinant Human Growth Hormone During Rehabilitation From Traumatic Brain Injury. | ||||||
Brief Summary | Growth Hormone (GH) deficiency, defined by insufficient GH response to a variety of stimulating compounds, is found in 20-35% of adults who suffer traumatic brain injuries (TBI) requiring inpatient rehabilitation1. However, there is no accepted gold standard for diagnosing GH deficiency in this population. Further, the major effector molecule of the somatotropic axis, Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1) has recently been recognized as an important neurotrophic agent. Since most repair and regeneration after TBI occurs within the first few months after injury, absolute or relative deficiencies of GH and IGF-1 in the subacute period after TBI are potentially important factors why some patients fail to make a good functional recovery. The proposed study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of rhGH, starting at 1 month post TBI, continuing for 6 months. This study has one primary hypothesis, that treatment with recombinant human Growth Hormone (rhGH) in the subacute period after TBI results in improved functional outcome 6 months after injury. As secondary hypotheses, we will investigate what is the optimal method to diagnose GH deficiency in TBI survivors and study the relationship between GH deficiency and insufficiency and functional recovery. |
||||||
Detailed Description | 1. Patient selection and enrollment. Participants will be recruited into the study from subjects admitted for acute inpatient rehabilitation in the North Texas Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (NT-TBIMS) affiliated rehabilitation units. Our goal is to enroll participants who have the potential for neuroregeneration, but who suffered a sufficiently severe injury that the chance of full recovery (to normal pre-injury function) is low. Over a 4 year enrollment period, we plan to randomize 168 subjects into the study (with the anticipation that 71 will complete each arm of the trial). Inclusion Criteria
5. GH deficiency diagnosed by either of the following two criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
We will measure baseline IGF-1 as well as carry out L-arginine GH stimulation tests prior to entry into the study, and measure IGF-1 levels again at completion of the treatment phase. 2. Treatment. After obtaining informed consent, we will measure IGF-1 levels as well as perform dynamic GH testing. Eligible patients will be randomization in a double-blind fashion to (Group 1) rhGH subcutaneously or (Group 2) placebo. The GH treatment arm will receive a starting dose of 400 microg/day, with increases (or decreases) in dose by 100-200 microg/day each month, monitoring for side effects, until goal IGF-1 (in the upper quartile of the range for age and body weight) is reached up to maximum dose of 1,000 microg/day. Dose adjustments may be modified by the investigators for participants receiving oral estrogens or other circumstances know to influence GH dosing or atypical responses to treatment. Doses for participants receiving placebo will also be adjusted monthly to maintain the blinding. The treatment will be overseen by a board certified endocrinologist (Dr. Auchus), according to practice guidelines recently released by the Endocrine Society "Clinical Guidelines for Evaluation and Treatment of Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency". The principle is that therapy is started at a relatively low dose and increased monthly, adjusting for the occurrence of adverse effects. In this study, to accommodate both GH-deficient and GH-sufficient strata, the treatment goal is serum IGF-1 as close as possible to the upper limit for the age-adjusted reference range without exceeding this normal range. The objective of randomization is to produce study groups comparable with respect to known and unknown risk factors, to remove investigator bias in the recruitment and allocation of participants and to guarantee that statistical tests have valid significance levels. To balance factors that may influence treatment outcome, randomization will be stratified and blocked, by two factors:
The goal of Phase II studies is to provide information about side effects and toxicities in the type of patients for whom the treatment is intended, determine the logistics of administration, provide estimates of treatment costs, and obtain some information about expected effect size. For reasons discussed above, we believe that such information is not yet available regarding the use rhGH in the early phase after TBI, and that a Phase II study designed to obtain this information is warranted. Drugs that remain promising after Phase II studies generally proceed to Phase III clinical trials, which typically require many hundreds of patients and are usually conducted at multiple centers and at great expense. Futility design trials were pioneered in cancer chemotherapy studies, and have recently been used in Phase II clinical trials of neurological disorders such as Parkinson's disease and stroke. A traditionally designed study focuses on efficacy, with a null hypothesis that the treatment arms are equivalent. In such studies, the assumption is that a false positive result is riskier than a false negative result (that it is riskier to falsely assume than an ineffective therapy works than it is to discard a potentially effective treatment). In such studies, it is customary to set alpha at 0.05 (the likelihood of a false positive result less than 5%), and beta at 0.2 (the likelihood of a false negative result--that a beneficial effect will be missed is less than 20%). A futility design incorporates the view that in the early phases of clinical development of a new therapy, it is in fact riskier to discard a potentially useful treatment than it is to fail to definitively identify efficacy, since that can only be done in a phase III study. Thus, in a phase II futility study the null hypothesis is that treatment has promise and will therefore produce results exceeding a meaningful threshold. Thus, alpha of 0.1 (as set in our study) in a futility study means that the chance of beneficial effect being missed is less than 10%. In a futility design, if the efficacy threshold is not met, the null hypothesis is rejected and further study of the treatment is considered futile42. Thus, for the primary hypothesis, the design of our study is that of a futility (non-superiority) study, powered to not reject a potentially useful therapy, rather than prove efficacy. The second relatively novel feature of our study is the use of a composite outcome statistic. A composite outcome statistic takes into account the fact that in a complex disorder such as TBI, there are multiple domains of dysfunction, and a single scale (such as the GOS-E or a given neuropsychometric test) may not be optimally sensitive to identify functionally important deficits in all patients. There are several mathematical approaches to the need to compare two groups with respect to more than one outcome. The options available include using Bonferroni or other adjustments for multiple comparisons, reducing the dimensions of the problem by averaging the outcomes, or applying a global test based on a multiple correlated binary outcomes43,44. Of these, the latter approach has been found to be useful in a variety of clinical settings. Incorporating several different measures, which although correlated measure different domains of dysfunction after TBI, significantly lowers the sample size required. We have elected to use a composite outcome statistic developed by the NIH TBI Clinical Trials Network, which will be used in the Citocholine Brain Injury Treatment (COBRIT) study. This measure was developed by a subcommittee of the NIH network that included clinicians, neuropsychologists, and biostatisticians, including Dr. Diaz-Arrastia and Dr. Sureyya Dikmen (who will serve in the DSMB for this trial). In our study, the use of a composite statistic lowers the sample size from 228 to 164. All participants in the GH treatment arm may not achieve goal serum IGF-1 values in the first month, yet data will be analyzed in an intention-to-treat manner. Primary Hypothesis:
|
||||||
Study Type ICMJE | Interventional | ||||||
Study Phase ICMJE | Phase 2 | ||||||
Study Design ICMJE | Allocation: Randomized Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Quadruple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor) Primary Purpose: Treatment |
||||||
Condition ICMJE | Traumatic Brain Injury | ||||||
Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||||
Study Arms ICMJE |
|
||||||
Publications * | Not Provided | ||||||
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||||
Recruitment Information | |||||||
Recruitment Status ICMJE | Completed | ||||||
Actual Enrollment ICMJE |
63 | ||||||
Original Estimated Enrollment ICMJE |
164 | ||||||
Actual Study Completion Date ICMJE | December 2013 | ||||||
Actual Primary Completion Date | June 2013 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||||
Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||||
Sex/Gender ICMJE |
|
||||||
Ages ICMJE | 18 Years to 50 Years (Adult) | ||||||
Accepts Healthy Volunteers ICMJE | No | ||||||
Contacts ICMJE | Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects | ||||||
Listed Location Countries ICMJE | United States | ||||||
Removed Location Countries | |||||||
Administrative Information | |||||||
NCT Number ICMJE | NCT00766038 | ||||||
Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | NTTBIMS-GH RCT NIDRR H133A07002708 Pfizer GA62816O |
||||||
Has Data Monitoring Committee | Yes | ||||||
U.S. FDA-regulated Product | Not Provided | ||||||
IPD Sharing Statement ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||||
Current Responsible Party | Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, University of Pennsylvania | ||||||
Original Responsible Party | Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, MD, PhD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center | ||||||
Current Study Sponsor ICMJE | University of Pennsylvania | ||||||
Original Study Sponsor ICMJE | University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center | ||||||
Collaborators ICMJE | Baylor Health Care System | ||||||
Investigators ICMJE |
|
||||||
PRS Account | University of Pennsylvania | ||||||
Verification Date | November 2019 | ||||||
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |