In this 24-week, single center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, the efficacy and safety of lyophilised oral fecal microbiota transplantation in patients with active refractory rheumatoid arthritis will be evaluated.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease, characterized by synovium inflammation and bone and joint erosions, leading to pain, morbidity and increased motality. Nearly half of RA patients displayed incomplete response or intolerance to the anchor drug-methotrexate. Gut microbiota plays an important role in the pathophysiology of RA and abnormal gut microeology has been documented in RA. FMT(fecal microbiota transplantation) is the engraftment of gut microbiota from healthy donors into a recipient, to ideally restore the normal gut microbial community structure. Hopefully, FMT could act as a promising strategy to improve disease control in refractory RA. Oral lyophilised fecal microbiota capsule provides a readily accessible and non-invasive way for FMT. This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of lyophilised oral FMT in patients with active RA refractory to conventional synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs)with or without biological DMARDs (bDMARDs)or targeting-synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of lyophilised oral FMT capsule in the treatment of active RA patients refractory to csDMARDs with or without bDMARDs or tsDMARDs; To evaluate the safety of lyophilised oral FMT capsule in the treatment of active RA patients refractory to csDMARDs with or without bDMARDs or tsDMARDs; DESIGN This is a Phase 2, randomized, 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, and 40 patients with active RA refractory to csDMARDs will be randomized in a 1:3 ratio to one of the following 2 parallel treatment arms: Placebo group: taking placebo capsules with no microbiota inside and continue previous csDMARDs regimen simutaneously; FMT group: taking lyophilised oral capsules with faecal microbiota prepared from health donors and continue previous csDMARDs regimen simutaneously; Placebo capsules were indistinguishable from FMT capsules by appearance and were stored in identical coded package. Disease activity and safety profile were evaluated at 8 weeks, 16 weeks and 24 weeks. Escape: On week 16, all participants with no response, defined as a \<20% improvement in TJC (tender joint count), SJC (swollen joint count) and CRP (C-reactive protein) from baseline can withdraw and switch to other treatment like biologics. Endpoints : Primary endpoint: ACR 20/50 response rates at 16 weeks. Secondary endpoint: 1. ACR70 response at 16 weeks; 2. ACR20/50/70 response at 24 weeks; 3. DAS 28 (CRP) and DAS 28 (ESR) at 16 and 24 weeks; 4. EULAR response rates at 16 and 24 weeks; 5. Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) at 16 and 24 weeks; 6. Patient assessment of joint pain (visual analogue scale,VAS) at 16 and 24 weeks; 7. Patient and physician global assessment (PtGA and PhGA)at 16 and 24 weeks;
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
40
Faecal microbiota is extracted from fresh stool collected from strictly screened health donors with canonical procedure, and then lyophilised and prepared into oral capsule.
placebo capsules with the same appearance as FMT capsules but no microbiota inside
Peking Union Medical College Hospital
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China
RECRUITINGACR 20/50 response rates at 16 weeks
at week 16, the difference in ratio of participants who achieve ACR 20/50 response in two groups.
Time frame: week 16
ACR70 response at 16 weeks
at week 16 and week 24, the difference in ratio of participants who achieve ACR 70 response in two groups.
Time frame: week 16
ACR20/50/70 response at 24 weeks
at week 24, the difference in ratio of participants who achieve ACR 20/50/70 response in two groups.
Time frame: week 24
DAS 28 (CRP) and DAS 28 (ESR) at 16 and 24 weeks
at week 16 and week 24, the difference of diease activity evaluated by DAS 28 (CRP) and DAS 28 (ESR) in two groups
Time frame: week 16 and week 24
EULAR response rates at 16 and 24 weeks;
at week 16 and week 24, the difference of EULAR response evaluated based on DAS 28 (CRP) or DAS 28 (ESR) in two groups
Time frame: week 16 and week 24
Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) at 16 and 24 weeks;
at week 16 and week 24, Health assessment questionnaire were evaluated and the change from baseline will be compared between two groups
Time frame: week 16 and week 24
Patient assessment of pain (visual analogue scale,VAS)at 16 and 24 weeks;
at week 16 and week 24, pain levels (VAS) of participants were compared between two groups
Time frame: week 16 and week 24
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Patient and physician global assessment (PtGA and PhGA) at 16 and 24 weeks;
at week 16 and week 24, global assessment from participants and from care providers will compared between two groups
Time frame: week 16 and week 24