Explore the vast range of titles available.

This multicenter, randomized trial showed significant benefit of propranolol for the treatment of infantile hemangiomas. Infantile hemangiomas are the most common soft-tissue tumors of childhood, occurring in 3 to 10% of infants. 1 – 4 Lesions are usually not developed at birth and are generally diagnosed during the first 4 to 6 weeks of life, with most growth during the first 5 months. 5 The characteristic evolution of nearly all infantile hemangiomas is proliferation, stabilization, and slow, spontaneous involution. Although most lesions follow an uncomplicated clinical course, approximately 12% result in complications requiring referral to a specialist. 6 , 7 Many infantile hemangiomas leave permanent sequelae, with potential psychological effects in the children and their parents. 8 , 9 Historically, systemic glucocorticoids . . .

Background Migraine is a neurological disorder affecting approximately 12% of the population, more frequent in women, causing disability. Preventive treatment is recommended to prevent chronification and analgesics’ abuse and to improve quality of life, but not all candidates receive it. Common preventive drugs include amitriptyline, flunarizine, propranolol, and topiramate. Their effectiveness and safety have not yet been assessed in our setting. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of these drugs in reducing the monthly migraine days (MMD) and to evaluate their safety. Methods Phase IV, pragmatic randomized clinical trial of four parallel groups, open and multicentric, in Primary Care in Catalonia, Spain. We will include adults with migraine eligible for preventive treatment. They will be randomized to the following: (1) propranolol, (2) amitriptyline, (3) flunarizine, or (4) topiramate. The main efficacy measure will be the change in the mean MMD at week 12 in comparison to the mean MMD at baseline. Other secondary efficacy and safety measures will be assessed. The main non-inferiority analysis will be conducted in the per protocol population at week 12, comparing topiramate versus propranolol as the main analysis, and amitriptyline and flunarizine versus propranolol as exploratory analyses. Discussion There are epidemiological, clinical and pharmacological sex-differences in migraine which may result in differences in the use of migraine preventive drugs. However, the effectiveness of the most frequent preventive treatment and the differences in effectiveness and safety between women and men have not yet been studied. Moreover, as new expensive drugs have been authorized for preventive treatment, indicated when the usual drugs have failed, assessing the effectiveness and safety of the usual oral preventive drugs through a clinical trial is especially important. We also plan to evaluate their cost-effectiveness, and the clinical trial will count on an active contribution from patients through an app designed for this purpose, which may help in the management of the disease in the future. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06499116 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06499116 ). Trial registration date: July 12, 2024. EU CT Number: 2024–513597-22. Protocol ID: IJG-PREMI-2024. Sponsor: Fundació d’Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol i Gurina. Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes 587, àtic. 08007, Barcelona, Spain.

The objective of this phase 1 study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and cardiac effect following administration of ponesimod (a selective sphingosine‐1‐phosphate receptor modulator) and propranolol in healthy adults. In treatment period (TP) 1, participants received ponesimod (2 mg). In TP2, if resting heart rate (HR) was ≥ 55 bpm, the ponesimod up‐titration regimen was initiated. Participants were randomized to TP2A (placebo plus ponesimod up‐titration) or TP2B (80 mg propranolol plus ponesimod up‐titration). Concomitant administration resulted in an increased bradyarrhythmic effect on HR versus ponesimod alone. The mean maximum difference in mean hourly HR from time‐matched baseline for TP2B compared with TP2A during the first 12 h post‐dose was −12.4 bpm. This was observed after the first dose of ponesimod, persisted for the first 4 doses, then decreased to −7.4 bpm post‐up‐titration. The lowest mean of the HRnadir in TP2B was 48.9 bpm (95% CI: 46.4–51.3). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of 1st degree AV block between groups and no occurrences of 2nd or higher degree AV block. No clinically relevant changes were observed in the PK of ponesimod or propranolol. Overall, 88.5% of participants experienced ≥ 1 AE during the study. In TP2, the most reported TEAEs (≥ 5%) considered related to ponesimod were fatigue (12 [25.5%]) and dizziness (10 [21.3%]). No deaths were reported. Co‐administration of ponesimod with propranolol resulted in a greater HR‐lowering effect compared to ponesimod alone, without significant changes in PK parameters or serious cardiac adverse events in healthy adults.

The noradrenergic system plays a critical role in the 'consolidation' of emotional memory. If we are to target 'reconsolidation' in patients with anxiety disorders, the noradrenergic strengthening of fear memory should not impair the disruption of reconsolidation. In Experiment I, we addressed this issue using a differential fear conditioning procedure allowing selective reactivation of one of two fear associations. First, we strengthened fear memory by administering an α(2)-adrenergic receptor antagonist (ie, yohimbine HCl; double-blind placebo-controlled study) 30 min before acquisition (time for peak value yohimbine HCl <1 h). Next, the reconsolidation of one of the fear associations was manipulated by administering a β-adrenergic receptor antagonist (ie, propranolol HCl) 90 min before its selective reactivation (time for peak value propranolol HCl <2 h). In Experiment II, we administered propranolol HCl after reactivation of the memory to rule out a possible effect of the pharmacological manipulation on the memory retrieval itself. The excessive release of noradrenaline during memory formation not only delayed the process of extinction 48 h later, but also triggered broader fear generalization. Yet, the β-adrenergic receptor blocker during reconsolidation selectively 'neutralized' the fear-arousing aspects of the noradrenergic-strengthened memory and undermined the generalization of fear. We observed a similar reduction in fear responding when propranolol HCl was administered after reactivation of the memory. The present findings demonstrate the involvement of noradrenergic modulation in the formation as well as generalization of human fear memory. Given that the noradrenergic strengthening of fear memory impaired extinction learning but not the disruption of reconsolidation, our findings may have implications for the treatment of anxiety disorders.

Background Cerebral cavernous malformations (CCMs) are vascular malformations characterized by clusters of enlarged leaky capillaries in the central nervous system. They may result in intracranial haemorrhage, epileptic seizure(s), or focal neurological deficits, and potentially lead to severe disability. Globally, CCMs represent the second most common intracranial vascular malformation in humans, and their familial form (FCCMs) accounts for one-fifth of cases. Neurosurgical excision, and perhaps stereotactic radiosurgery, is the only available therapeutic option. Case reports suggest that propranolol might modify disease progression. Methods Treat_CCM is a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE), parallel-group trial involving six Italian clinical centres with central reading of brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and adverse events. Patients with symptomatic FCCMs are randomized (2:1 ratio) either to propranolol (40–80 mg twice daily) in addition to standard care or to standard care alone (i.e. anti-epileptic drugs or headache treatments). The primary outcome is intracranial haemorrhage or focal neurological deficit attributable to CCMs. The secondary outcomes are MRI changes over time (i.e. de novo CCM lesions, CCM size and signal characteristics, iron deposition, and vascular leakage as assessed by quantitative susceptibility mapping and dynamic contrast enhanced permeability), disability, health-related quality of life, depression severity, and anxiety (SF-36, BDI-II, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). Discussion Treat_CCM will evaluate the safety and efficacy of propranolol for CCMs following promising case reports in a randomized controlled trial. The direction of effect on the primary outcome and the consistency of effects on the secondary outcomes (even if none of them yield statistically significant differences) of this external pilot study may lead to a larger sample size in a definitive phase 2 trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT03589014 . Retrospectively registered on 17 July 2018.

Background A large number patients struggle with migraine which is classified as a chronic disorder. The relative efficacy, safety and tolerability of prophylactic medications for migraine play a key role in managing this disease. Methods We conducted an extensive literature search for popular prophylactic medications that are used for migraine patients. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were carried out sequentially for determining the relative efficacy, safety and tolerability of prophylactic medications. Summary effect for migraine headache days, headache frequency, at least 50% reduction in headache attacks, all-adverse events, nausea, somnolence, dizziness, withdrawal and withdrawal due to adverse events were produced by synthesizing both direct and indirect evidence. Results Patients with three interventions exhibited significantly less average migraine headache days compared with those treated by placebo (topiramate, propranolol, divalproex). Moreover, topiramate and valproate exhibited a significantly increased likelihood of at least 50% reduction in migraine headache attacks compared to placebo. Patients with topiramate and propranolol also exhibited significantly reduced headache frequency compared to those with placebo. On the other hand, patients with divalproex exhibited significantly higher risk of nausea compared to those with placebo, topiramate, propranolol, gabapentin and amitriptyline. Finally, divalproex was associated with an increased risk of withdrawal compared to placebo and propranolol. Conclusions Topiramate, propranolol and divalproex may be more efficacious than other prophylactic medications. Besides, the safety and tolerability of divalproex should be further verified by future studies.

Background and aimsBleeding from gastric varices is often severe and difficult to manage. Endoscopic injection of gastric varices with cyanoacrylate is effective in prevention of rebleeding. The efficacy of β-blockers in secondary prophylaxis of gastric variceal bleed has not been well studied. A comparison of the efficacy of β-blocker treatment and cyanoacrylate injection for the prevention of gastric variceal rebleeding was carried out.MethodsPatients with gastro-oesophageal varices type 2 (GOV2) with eradicated oesophageal varices or isolated gastric varices type 1 (IGV1) who had bled from gastric varices were randomised to cyanoacrylate injection (n=33) or β-blocker treatment (n=34). Baseline and follow-up upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurements were performed. Primary end points were gastric variceal rebleeding or death.ResultsThe probability of gastric variceal rebleeding rate in the cyanoacrylate group was significantly lower than in the β-blocker group (15% vs 55%, p=0.004) and the mortality rate was lower (3% vs 25%, p=0.026) during a median follow-up of 26 months. The median baseline and follow-up HVPG in the cyanoacrylate group were 15 (10–23) and 17 (11–24) mm Hg (p=0.001) and for the β-blocker group 14 (11–24) and 13 (8–25) mm Hg (p=0.003). While no patient showed reduction of HVPG in the cyanoacrylate group, in the β-blocker group 12 of 28 (42%) patients were responders, of which 5 (41% of responders) bled. On multivariate analysis, treatment method, portal hypertensive gastropathy and size of the gastric varix >20 mm independently correlated with gastric variceal rebleeding. Gastric variceal rebleeding independently correlated with mortality.ConclusionsCyanoacrylate injection is more effective than β-blocker treatment for the prevention of gastric variceal rebleeding and improving survival.Clinical trial numberNCT00888784.

BackgroundStroke-induced transient immune suppression is believed to contribute to post-stroke infections. The β-adrenergic receptor antagonist, propranolol, has been shown to prevent stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP) via reversing post-stroke immunosuppression in preclinical studies and in retrospective analysis in stroke patients. However, whether propranolol can reduce the risk of SAP has not been tested in prospective, randomised controlled trials.AimTo describe the rationale and design of a multicentre, prospective, open-label, endpoint-blinded, randomised controlled study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of propranolol hydrochloride injection for the prevention of SAP in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) (PROCHASE).DesignIn this investigator-initiated trial, we compare the safety of the standard medical treatment to standard medical treatment plus intravenous propranolol hydrochloride administration (5 mg daily on days 1–7) in patients with ICH and the efficacy of this intervention to reduce the occurrence of SAP. All patients will be followed up for 90±7 days.Study outcomesThe primary efficacy outcome is SAP within 7±1 days diagnosed by the defined algorithm based on a diagnosis of SAP recommendations from the pneumonia in stroke consensus group. The primary safety outcome is defined as severe or moderate bradycardia within 7±1 days. The secondary outcome is a modified Rankin score of 0–3 at 90±7 days after randomisation.DiscussionThe PROCHASE trial aims to generate clinical evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of propranolol in preventing SAP in patients with ICH.

Background Severe TBI, defined as a Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8, increases intracranial pressure and activates the sympathetic nervous system. Sympathetic hyperactivity after TBI manifests as catecholamine excess, hypertension, abnormal heart rate variability, and agitation, and is associated with poor neuropsychological outcome. Propranolol and clonidine are centrally acting drugs that may decrease sympathetic outflow, brain edema, and agitation. However, there is no prospective randomized evidence available demonstrating the feasibility, outcome benefits, and safety for adrenergic blockade after TBI. Methods/Design The DASH after TBI study is an actively accruing, single-center, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, two-arm trial, where one group receives centrally acting sympatholytic drugs, propranolol (1 mg intravenously every 6 h for 7 days) and clonidine (0.1 mg per tube every 12 h for 7 days), and the other group, double placebo, within 48 h of severe TBI. The study uses a weighted adaptive minimization randomization with categories of age and Marshall head CT classification. Feasibility will be assessed by ability to provide a neuroradiology read for randomization, by treatment contamination, and by treatment compliance. The primary endpoint is reduction in plasma norepinephrine level as measured on day 8. Secondary endpoints include comprehensive plasma and urine catecholamine levels, heart rate variability, arrhythmia occurrence, infections, agitation measures using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and Agitated Behavior scale, medication use (anti-hypertensive, sedative, analgesic, and antipsychotic), coma-free days, ventilator-free days, length of stay, and mortality. Neuropsychological outcomes will be measured at hospital discharge and at 3 and 12 months. The domains tested will include global executive function, memory, processing speed, visual-spatial, and behavior. Other assessments include the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale and Quality of Life after Brain Injury scale. Safety parameters evaluated will include cardiac complications. Discussion The DASH After TBI Study is the first randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial powered to determine feasibility and investigate safety and outcomes associated with adrenergic blockade in patients with severe TBI. If the study results in positive trends, this could provide pilot evidence for a larger multicenter randomized clinical trial. If there is no effect of therapy, this trial would still provide a robust prospective description of sympathetic hyperactivity after TBI. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01322048

Objectives: Our primary objective was to review the current use of propranolol for treatment of infantile hemangioma (IH), specifically regarding 1) the age at initiation of therapy, 2) the method of initiation, 3) the use of other adjuvant therapy, 4) the duration of therapy and relapse rate, 5) the adverse events, and 6) the outcome. Our secondary objective was to describe a randomized, controlled, single-blinded trial comparing propranolol to prednisolone for treatment of IH. Methods: Ovid Medline and PubMed searches were completed for the MeSH keywords “propranolol” and “hemangioma.” Forty-nine English-language articles were published between June 2008 and September 2010, and 28 of these reported data from a total of 213 patients. Only 6 studies treated more than 10 patients, and these were selected for review in detail (154 patients). Results: The treatment was initiated during infancy in 92.9% of patients (mean, 4.5 months). Sixty-five percent of patients were treated with 2 mg/kg per day, and 25.3% with 3 mg/kg per day. Patients were monitored overnight at initiation of treatment in 3 series (59 patients), for 4 to 6 hours as outpatients in 2 series (62 patients), and initially as inpatients but later as outpatients in 1 series (32 patients). Propranolol was used as sole therapy in about two thirds of patients (103 patients). Treatment was ongoing in 46% of patients at the time of publication. The average treatment duration in the remaining patients was 5.1 months. Rebound growth occurred in 21% of patients after a mean of 4.3 months of therapy. Adverse events occurred in 18.1% of patients and included hypotension in 6, somnolence in 6, wheezing in 4, insomnia, agitation, and/or nightmares in 6, cool hands or night sweats in 2, gastroesophageal reflux in 3, and psoriasis-like rash in 1. All authors reported a favorable outcome with propranolol, but the definition of efficacy was not standardized. Conclusions: Propranolol is an attractive alternative to other treatments for IH. Despite apparent widespread use of this medication, the data are limited, and prospective studies are lacking for this indication. The relatively high rate of adverse effects supports the need for careful monitoring of patients on this therapy. Fastidious reporting of adverse events and objective evaluation of early and late outcomes are necessary to improve our understanding of the use of propranolol for this indication.