Determinants of Achieving Serum Urate Goal with Treat-to-Target Urate-Lowering Therapy in Gout

OBJECTIVE

Using trial data comparing treat-to-target allopurinol and febuxostat in gout, we examined participant characteristics associated with serum urate (SU) goal achievement.

METHODS

Participants with gout and SU ≥6.8 mg/dL were randomized to allopurinol or febuxostat, titrated during weeks 0 to 24, and maintained weeks 25 to 48. Participants were considered to achieve SU goal if the mean SU from weeks 36, 42, and 48 was <6.0 mg/dL or <5 mg/dL if tophi were present. Possible determinants of treatment response were preselected and included sociodemographics, comorbidities, diuretic use, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), body mass index, and gout measures. Determinants of SU response were assessed using multivariable logistic regression with additional analyses to account for treatment adherence.

RESULTS

Of 764 study participants completing week 48, 618 (81%) achieved SU goal. After multivariable adjustment, factors associated with a greater likelihood of SU goal achievement included older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.40 per 10 years), higher education (aOR 2.02), and better HRQoL (aOR 1.17 per 0.1 unit). Factors associated with a lower odds of SU goal achievement included non-White race (aORs 0.32-0.47), higher baseline SU (aOR 0.83 per 1 mg/dL), presence of tophi (aOR 0.29), and the use of diuretics (aOR 0.52). Comorbidities including chronic kidney disease, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease were not associated with SU goal achievement. Results were not meaningfully changed in analyses accounting for adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Several patient-level factors were predictive of SU goal achievement among patients with gout who received treat-to-target urate-lowering therapy (ULT). Approaches that accurately predict individual responses to treat-to-target ULT hold promise in facilitating personalized management and improving outcomes in patients with gout.

Intravenous aviptadil and remdesivir for treatment of COVID-19-associated hypoxaemic respiratory failure in the USA (TESICO): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical need for therapeutics for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure whose 60-day mortality remains at 30-50%. Aviptadil, a lung-protective neuropeptide, and remdesivir, a nucleotide prodrug of an adenosine analog, were compared with placebo among patients with COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

METHODS

TESICO was a randomised trial of aviptadil and remdesivir versus placebo at 28 sites in the USA. Hospitalised adult patients were eligible for the study if they had acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were within 4 days of the onset of respiratory failure. Participants could be randomly assigned to both study treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design or to just one of the agents. Participants were randomly assigned with a web-based application. For each site, randomisation was stratified by disease severity (high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventilation vs invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]), and four strata were defined by remdesivir and aviptadil eligibility, as follows: (1) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil and remdesivir in the 2 × 2 factorial design; participants were equally randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to intravenous aviptadil plus remdesivir, aviptadil plus remdesivir matched placebo, aviptadil matched placebo plus remdesvir, or aviptadil placebo plus remdesivir placebo; (2) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was started before randomisation; (3) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was contraindicated; and (4) eligible for randomisation to remdesivir only because aviptadil was contraindicated. For participants in strata 2-4, randomisation was 1:1 to the active agent or matched placebo. Aviptadil was administered as a daily 12-h infusion for 3 days, targeting 600 pmol/kg on infusion day 1, 1200 pmol/kg on day 2, and 1800 pmol/kg on day 3. Remdesivir was administered as a 200 mg loading dose, followed by 100 mg daily maintenance doses for up to a 10-day total course. For participants assigned to placebo for either agent, matched saline placebo was administered in identical volumes. For both treatment comparisons, the primary outcome, assessed at day 90, was a six-category ordinal outcome: (1) at home (defined as the type of residence before hospitalisation) and off oxygen (recovered) for at least 77 days, (2) at home and off oxygen for 49-76 days, (3) at home and off oxygen for 1-48 days, (4) not hospitalised but either on supplemental oxygen or not at home, (5) hospitalised or in hospice care, or (6) dead. Mortality up to day 90 was a key secondary outcome. The independent data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the aviptadil trial on May 25, 2022, for futility. On June 9, 2022, the sponsor stopped the trial of remdesivir due to slow enrolment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04843761.

FINDINGS

Between April 21, 2021, and May 24, 2022, we enrolled 473 participants in the study. For the aviptadil comparison, 471 participants were randomly assigned to aviptadil or matched placebo. The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 461 participants who received at least a partial infusion of aviptadil (231 participants) or aviptadil matched placebo (230 participants). For the remdesivir comparison, 87 participants were randomly assigned to remdesivir or matched placebo and all received some infusion of remdesivir (44 participants) or remdesivir matched placebo (43 participants). 85 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses for both agents (ie, those enrolled in the 2 x 2 factorial). For the aviptadil versus placebo comparison, the median age was 57 years (IQR 46-66), 178 (39%) of 461 participants were female, and 246 (53%) were Black, Hispanic, Asian or other (vs 215 [47%] White participants). 431 (94%) of 461 participants were in an intensive care unit at baseline, with 271 (59%) receiving high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventiliation, 185 (40%) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and five (1%) receiving ECMO. The odds ratio (OR) for being in a better category of the primary efficacy endpoint for aviptadil versus placebo at day 90, from a model stratified by baseline disease severity, was 1·11 (95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·54). Up to day 90, 86 participants in the aviptadil group and 83 in the placebo group died. The cumulative percentage who died up to day 90 was 38% in the aviptadil group and 36% in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·77-1·41; p=0·78). The primary safety outcome of death, serious adverse events, organ failure, serious infection, or grade 3 or 4 adverse events up to day 5 occurred in 146 (63%) of 231 patients in the aviptadil group compared with 129 (56%) of 230 participants in the placebo group (OR 1·40, 95% CI 0·94-2·08; p=0·10).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, aviptadil did not significantly improve clinical outcomes up to day 90 when compared with placebo. The smaller than planned sample size for the remdesivir trial did not permit definitive conclusions regarding safety or efficacy.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health.

Efficacy and Safety of Ensovibep for Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone.

DESIGN

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978).

SETTING

Multinational, multicenter trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

INTERVENTION

Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo.

MEASUREMENTS

Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90.

RESULTS

An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR < 1 would favor ensovibep).

LIMITATION

The trial was prematurely stopped because of futility, limiting power for the primary outcome.

CONCLUSION

Compared with placebo, ensovibep did not improve clinical outcomes for hospitalized participants with COVID-19 receiving standard care, including remdesivir; no safety concerns were identified.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Low-dose methylprednisolone treatment in critically ill patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia

Purpose

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requiring intensive care unit admission is associated with significant acute and long-term morbidity and mortality. We hypothesized that downregulation of systemic and pulmonary inflammation with prolonged low-dose methylprednisolone treatment would accelerate pneumonia resolution and improve clinical outcomes.

Methods

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial recruited adult patients within 72–96 h of hospital presentation. Patients were randomized in 1:1 ratio; an intravenous 40 mg loading bolus was followed by 40 mg/day through day 7 and progressive tapering during the 20-day treatment course. Randomization was stratified by site and need for mechanical ventilation (MV) at the time of randomization. Outcomes included a primary endpoint of 60-day all-cause mortality and secondary endpoints of morbidity and mortality up to 1 year of follow-up.

Results

Between January 2012 and April 2016, 586 patients from 42 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers were randomized, short of the 1420 target sample size because of low recruitment. 584 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in 60-day mortality between the methylprednisolone and placebo arms (16% vs. 18%; adjusted odds ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.57–1.40). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes or complications.

Conclusions

In patients with severe CAP, prolonged low-dose methylprednisolone treatment did not significantly reduce 60-day mortality. Treatment was not associated with increased complications.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06684-3.

Comparative Effectiveness of Allopurinol and Febuxostat in Gout Management

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy and safety of allopurinol and febuxostat when used according to current guidelines for the treatment of hyperuricemia are unknown. This double-blind noninferiority trial examined these issues.

METHODS

Participants with gout and hyperuricemia (with at least 33% having stage 3 chronic kidney disease) were randomly assigned to allopurinol or febuxostat in this 72-week trial, with doses titrated to target serum urate. The trial had three phases: titration (weeks 0 to 24), maintenance (weeks 25 to 48), and observation (weeks 49 to 72). Allopurinol and febuxostat were initiated at daily doses of 100 and 40 mg, with maximum titration to 800 and 120 mg, respectively. Antiinflammatory prophylaxis was given during phases 1 and 2. The primary end point was the proportion of patients experiencing one or more flares during phase 3, with a prespecified noninferiority margin of less than 8 percentage points between allopurinol and febuxostat. Secondary end points included efficacy in patients with chronic kidney disease, proportion achieving target serum urate levels, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

This study included 940 participants; 20.1% withdrew, with similar proportions in treatment arms. During phase 3, 36.5% of allopurinol-treated participants had one flare or more compared with 43.5% of febuxostat-treated participants (P<0.001 for noninferiority). Overall, 80% of participants achieved mean target urates during phase 2 with no differences by treatment. There were no treatment differences (including cardiovascular events) in serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Allopurinol and febuxostat achieved serum urate goals in patients with gout; allopurinol was noninferior to febuxostat in controlling flares. Similar outcomes were noted in participants with stage 3 chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the Cooperative Studies Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02579096.).

Microbiota or placebo after antimicrobial therapy for recurrent Clostridioides difficile at home: A clinical trial with novel home-based enrollment

INTRODUCTION

Clostridiodes difficile infection is the leading cause of infectious diarrhea in the United States, with substantial morbidity and mortality. Recurrent infection is especially challenging, with each recurrence increasing the likelihood of a successive recurrence, leading to cycles of prolonged symptoms, frequent antimicrobial use, and decreased quality of life. Fecal microbiota transplantation to prevent recurrent infection is a promising intervention with a large effect size in observational studies, but with conflicting results from randomized controlled trials. We are conducting a Veterans Affairs-wide randomized controlled trial utilizing centralized case identification, with enrollment and fecal microbiota transplant administration occurring at the participant's home. This type of trial design significantly improves trial efficiency, greatly decreases trial cost, increases consistency of trial administration, and most importantly makes nationwide clinical trials in less-common diseases possible.

METHODS

This is a randomized comparison of capsule-delivered fecal microbiota transplant for the prevention of recurrent Clostridiodes difficile infection, administered after successful initial treatment of recurrent C. difficile infection with standard therapy. The primary endpoint is the incidence of recurrent C. difficile infection or death. Cases are identified by searching the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse, with central study coordinators then reaching out to potential participants. Individuals meeting inclusion criteria and interested in participation are scheduled for in-home consent, randomization, and capsule administration, followed by telephone follow-up for 6 months. To mitigate risks of COVID-19, enrollment via video visits has been implemented.

RESULTS

A total of 102 participants have been enrolled through January 2021. Centralized case identification and in-home enrollment has facilitated enrollment from 34 unique states, with 38% being from rural or highly rural areas.

DISCUSSION

Centralized case identification and in-home enrollment is a feasible and innovative method of conducting randomized controlled trials in the Veterans Affairs system, improving access to clinical research for populations who may have difficulty engaging with the traditional model of clinical trials where enrollment is based at large hospitals in major metropolitan areas.

Randomized Trial of Medical versus Surgical Treatment for Refractory Heartburn

BACKGROUND

Heartburn that persists despite proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is a frequent clinical problem with multiple potential causes. Treatments for PPI-refractory heartburn are of unproven efficacy and focus on controlling gastroesophageal reflux with reflux-reducing medication (e.g., baclofen) or antireflux surgery or on dampening visceral hypersensitivity with neuromodulators (e.g., desipramine).

METHODS

Patients who were referred to Veterans Affairs (VA) gastroenterology clinics for PPI-refractory heartburn received 20 mg of omeprazole twice daily for 2 weeks, and those with persistent heartburn underwent endoscopy, esophageal biopsy, esophageal manometry, and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring. If patients were found to have reflux-related heartburn, we randomly assigned them to receive surgical treatment (laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication), active medical treatment (omeprazole plus baclofen, with desipramine added depending on symptoms), or control medical treatment (omeprazole plus placebo). The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as a decrease of 50% or more in the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)-Health Related Quality of Life score (range, 0 to 50, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms) at 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 366 patients (mean age, 48.5 years; 280 men) were enrolled. Prerandomization procedures excluded 288 patients: 42 had relief of their heartburn during the 2-week omeprazole trial, 70 did not complete trial procedures, 54 were excluded for other reasons, 23 had non-GERD esophageal disorders, and 99 had functional heartburn (not due to GERD or other histopathologic, motility, or structural abnormality). The remaining 78 patients underwent randomization. The incidence of treatment success with surgery (18 of 27 patients, 67%) was significantly superior to that with active medical treatment (7 of 25 patients, 28%; P = 0.007) or control medical treatment (3 of 26 patients, 12%; P<0.001). The difference in the incidence of treatment success between the active medical group and the control medical group was 16 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -5 to 38; P = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients referred to VA gastroenterology clinics for PPI-refractory heartburn, systematic workup revealed truly PPI-refractory and reflux-related heartburn in a minority of patients. For that highly selected subgroup, surgery was superior to medical treatment. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01265550.).

Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Treatment-Resistant Major Depression in US Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Treatment-resistant major depression (TRMD) in veterans is a major clinical challenge given the high risk for suicidality in these patients. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) offers the potential for a novel treatment modality for these veterans.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of rTMS in the treatment of TRMD in veterans.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A double-blind, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 1, 2012, to December 31, 2016, in 9 Veterans Affairs medical centers. A total of 164 veterans with TRD participated.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to either left prefrontal rTMS treatment (10 Hz, 120% motor threshold, 4000 pulses/session) or to sham (control) rTMS treatment for up to 30 treatment sessions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary dependent measure of the intention-to-treat analysis was remission rate (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score ≤10, indicating that depression is in remission and not a clinically significant burden), and secondary analyses were conducted on other indices of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, hopelessness, suicidality, and quality of life.

RESULTS

The 164 participants had a mean (SD) age of 55.2 (12.4) years, 132 (80.5%) were men, and 126 (76.8%) were of white race. Of these, 81 were randomized to receive active rTMS and 83 to receive sham. For the primary analysis of remission, there was no significant effect of treatment (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.59-2.26; P = .67). At the end of the acute treatment phase, 33 of 81 (40.7%) of those in the active treatment group achieved remission of depressive symptoms compared with 31 of 83 (37.4%) of those in the sham treatment group. Overall, 64 of 164 (39.0%) of the participants achieved remission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A total of 39.0% of the veterans who participated in this trial experienced clinically significant improvement resulting in remission of depressive symptoms; however, there was no evidence of difference in remission rates between the active and sham treatments. These findings may reflect the importance of close clinical surveillance, rigorous monitoring of concomitant medication, and regular interaction with clinic staff in bringing about significant improvement in this treatment-resistant population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01191333.

Design and Rationale for the Veterans Affairs "Cooperative Study Program 594 Comparative Effectiveness in Gout: Allopurinol vs. Febuxostat" Trial

BACKGROUND

Gout patients do not routinely achieve optimal outcomes related in part to suboptimal administration of urate lowering therapy (ULT) including first-line xanthine oxidase inhibitors allopurinol or febuxostat. Studies leading to the approval of febuxostat compared this agent to allopurinol in inappropriately low, fixed doses. We will compare allopurinol with febuxostat in gout using appropriately titrated doses of both agents and a "treat-to-target" strategy congruent with specialty guidelines.

METHODS

We have planned and initiated the Veterans Affairs (VA) Cooperative Study Program (CSP) 594, Comparative Effectiveness in Gout: Allopurinol vs Febuxostat study. This large double-blind, non-inferiority trial will enroll 950 gout patients randomized to receive allopurinol or febuxostat. Patients will be followed for a total of 72 weeks encompassing 3 distinct 24-week study phases. During Phase I (0-24 weeks), participants will undergo gradual dose titration of ULT until achievement of serum uric acid (sUA) <6.0 mg/dL or <5.0 mg/dL if tophi are present. Dose escalation will not be allowed during final three study visits of Phase 2 (24-48 weeks) and during Phase 3 (48-72 weeks). The primary study outcome is the proportion of participants experiencing at least one gout flare during Phase 3. Subsequent to the 72-week study, participants will be followed passively for up to 10 years after the study to assess long-term health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

With its completion, the VA Comparative Effectiveness in Gout: Allopurinol vs Febuxostat study will demonstrate the central role of gradual ULT dose escalation and a treat-to-target strategy in gout management.

Total integrated performance excellence system (TIPES): A true north direction for a clinical trial support center

This paper presents the quality journey taken by a Federal organization over more than 20 years. These efforts have resulted in the implementation of a Total Integrated Performance Excellence System (TIPES) that combines key principles and practices of established quality systems. The Center has progressively integrated quality system frameworks including the Malcom Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) Framework and Criteria for Performance Excellence, ISO 9001, and the Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3), as well as supplemental quality systems of ISO 15378 (packaging for medicinal products) and ISO 21500 (guide to project management) to systematically improve all areas of operations. These frameworks were selected for applicability to Center processes and systems, consistency and reinforcement of complimentary approaches, and international acceptance. External validations include the MBNQA, the highest quality award in the US, continued registration and conformance to ISO standards and guidelines, and multiple VA and state awards. With a focus on a holistic approach to quality involving processes, systems and personnel, this paper presents activities and lessons that were critical to building TIPES and establishing the quality environment for conducting clinical research in support of Veterans and national health care.

Trial of Prazosin for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Military Veterans

BACKGROUND

In randomized trials, prazosin, an α₁-adrenoreceptor antagonist, has been effective in alleviating nightmares associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in military veterans.

METHODS

We recruited veterans from 13 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers who had chronic PTSD and reported frequent nightmares. Participants were randomly assigned to receive prazosin or placebo for 26 weeks; the drug or placebo was administered in escalating divided doses over the course of 5 weeks to a daily maximum of 20 mg in men and 12 mg in women. After week 10, participants continued to receive prazosin or placebo in a double-blind fashion for an additional 16 weeks. The three primary outcome measures were the change in score from baseline to 10 weeks on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) item B2 ("recurrent distressing dreams"; scores range from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more frequent and more distressing dreams); the change in score from baseline to 10 weeks on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI; scores range from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating worse sleep quality); and the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) score at 10 weeks (scores range from 1 to 7, with lower scores indicating greater improvement and a score of 4 indicating no change).

RESULTS

A total of 304 participants underwent randomization; 152 were assigned to prazosin, and 152 to placebo. At 10 weeks, there were no significant differences between the prazosin group and the placebo group in the mean change from baseline in the CAPS item B2 score (between-group difference, 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.3 to 0.8; P=0.38), in the mean change in PSQI score (between-group difference, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.9 to 1.1; P=0.80), or in the CGIC score (between-group difference, 0; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.3; P=0.96). There were no significant differences in these measures at 26 weeks (a secondary outcome) or in other secondary outcomes. At 10 weeks, the mean difference between the prazosin group and the placebo group in the change from baseline in supine systolic blood pressure was a decrease of 6.7 mm Hg. The adverse event of new or worsening suicidal ideation occurred in 8% of the participants assigned to prazosin versus 15% of those assigned to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial involving military veterans who had chronic PTSD, prazosin did not alleviate distressing dreams or improve sleep quality. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; PACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00532493 .).

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treatment-resistant major depression (TRMD) Veteran patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Evaluation of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treatment-resistant major depression (TRMD) in Veterans offers unique clinical trial challenges. Here we describe a randomized, double-blinded, intent-to-treat, two-arm, superiority parallel design, a multicenter study funded by the Cooperative Studies Program (CSP No. 556) of the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Methods

We recruited medical providers with clinical expertise in treating TRMD at nine Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers as the trial local investigators. We plan to enroll 360 Veterans diagnosed with TRMD at the nine VA medical centers over a 3-year period. We will randomize participants into a double-blinded clinical trial to left prefrontal rTMS treatment or to sham (control) rTMS treatment (180 participants each group) for up to 30 treatment sessions. All participants will meet Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4^thedition (DSM-IV) criteria for major depression and will have failed at least two prior pharmacological interventions. In contrast with other rTMS clinical trials, we will not exclude Veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or history of substance abuse and we will obtain detailed history regarding these disorders. Furthermore, we will maintain participants on stable anti-depressant medication throughout the trial. We will evaluate all participants on a wide variety of potential predictors of treatment response including cognitive, psychological and functional parameters.

Discussion

The primary dependent measure will be remission rate (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD24) ≤ 10), and secondary analyses will be conducted on other indices. Comparisons between the rTMS and the sham groups will be made at the end of the acute treatment phase to test the primary hypothesis. The unique challenges to performing such a large technically challenging clinical trial with Veterans and potential avenues for improvement of the design in future trials will be described.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01191333. Registered on 26 August 2010. This report is based on the protocol version 4.6 amended in February 2016. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set are listed in Appendix A.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2125-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.