Nasal Polyps, Sinusitis
Conditions
Brief summary
Verapamil is an L-type calcium channel blocker(CCB) which has been shown to reduce inflammation in a variety of tissues. Verapamil has also been shown to improve eosinophilic inflammation in an animal model of asthma and also functions as a P-glycoprotein(P-gp) inhibitor. A major subtype of chronic rhinosinusitis(CRS) is characterized by eosinophilic inflammation as well as P-gp overexpression. The goal of this study is to therefore see whether Verapamil may be used to treat CRS.
Detailed description
Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) impacts more than 30 million Americans resulting in $6.9 to $9.9 billion in annual healthcare expenditures and $12.8 billion in productivity costs. The prevalence of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps(CRSwNP) in Europe has been estimated to be 2-4.3% and is thought to be similar in the United States. Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment although novel therapies are being developed based on an evolving understanding of the inflammatory pathways involved in disease pathogenesis. CRSwNP is characterized by the presence of edematous polypoid mucosa and predominantly eosinophilic inflammation. Recent evidence has focused on the sinonasal epithelial cell as a primary driver of the local dysregulated immune response through secretion of type 2 helper T-cell(Th2) promoting cytokines. While these studies suggest that epithelial cells are capable of orchestrating a local immune response, the mechanisms responsible for regulating cytokine secretion are poorly understood and may be influenced by the efflux function of epithelial P-glycoprotein(P-gp). P-gp is a 170 kiloDalton membrane protein which belongs to sub-family B of the adenosine triphosphate(ATP)-binding cassette(ABC) transporter superfamily. P-gp utilizes ATP hydrolysis to transport a wide range of substrates across the plasma membrane. P-gp mediated transport has been observed in the regulation of cytokine secretion in both human T-cells as well as sinonasal epithelial cells implicating a potential immunomodulatory role. Studies by our group have demonstrated that P-gp is overexpressed in the mucosa of patients with Th2 skewed CRS endotypes including CRSwNP and is capable of regulating the secretion of Th2 polarizing cytokines. Together, these findings suggest that P-gp participates in the non-canonical regulation of cytokine secretion within CRSwNP and may thereby represent a druggable target. Verapamil Hydrochloride(HCl) was one of the first inhibitors of P-gp to be identified in 1982 and also functions as a calcium channel blocker(CCB). Verapamil has since been categorized as a first generation P-gp inhibitor as more potent and selective 2nd and 3rd generation molecules were subsequently developed for use as chemotherapy sensitizers. Several studies, including those by our group, have reported that Verapamil is capable of modulating inflammatory responses in human T-cells, animal models of asthma, and nasal polyps. Using an organotypic explant model, we have previously shown that Verapamil has similar effects to dexamethasone in its ability to abrogate Interleukin(IL)-5, IL-6, and Thymic Stromal Lymphopoietin secretion. While Verapamil is cardioactive, it is considered the first-line prophylactic drug for cluster headache and is usually well tolerated by otherwise healthy patients. In light of our prior studies demonstrating the immunomodulatory role of P-gp in promoting Th2 skewing cytokine secretion in CRSwNP, we hypothesized that low dose Verapamil HCl monotherapy would be safe and effective in the treatment of CRSwNP.
Interventions
Verapamil represents a calcium channel blocker which binds to the alpha subunit of L-type voltage dependent calcium (Cav1) channels thereby blocking the influx of calcium ions into the host cell. While Verapamil is classically used to promote the relaxation of cardiac and smooth muscle cells, recent evidence has suggested that it may also function as an immunomodulator in astrocytes, hepatocytes, and T-cells. Further research has demonstrated that Verapamil is capable of specifically reducing Th2 associated inflammation in asthma. These findings raise the provocative question as to whether Verapamil could also be effective in reducing inflammation in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.
Capsule with the same characteristics (size, color, smell) as Verapamil HCl.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
1. Patients presenting to the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Sinus Center 2. Age 18-80 yrs old 3. Diagnosed with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps according to the EPOS 2012 consensus criteria
Exclusion criteria
1. Patients with the following comorbidities: * GI Hypomotility * Heart Failure * Liver Failure * Kidney Disease * Muscular Dystrophy * Pregnant or Nursing Females * Steroid Dependency 2. Patients taking the following medications: * Aspirin * Beta-blockers * Cimetidine(Tagamet) * Clarithromycin(Biaxin) * Cyclosporin * Digoxin * Disopyramide(Norpace) * Diuretics * Erythromycin * Flecainide * HIV Protease Inhibitors(Indinavir, Nelfinavir, Ritonavir) * Quinidine * Lithium * Pioglitazone * Rifampin * St Johns Wort 3. Patients with cardiac or conduction abnormality picked up by screening EKG
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | baseline to week 8 | Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 110 A higher score indicates a worse outcome |
| Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | baseline to week 8 | Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 100 A higher score indicates a worse outcome. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-Kennedy Score(LKS) | baseline to week 8 | Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 12 Higher value represents worse outcome. |
| Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-McKay Score(LMS) | Week 8 | Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 24 Higher value represents worse outcome. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Systolic Blood Pressure | Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements |
| Diastolic Blood Pressure | Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements |
| Heart Rate | Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Treatment Verapamil HCl, capsules for oral administration, 80mg, TID, for 8 weeks
Verapamil HCl: Verapamil represents a calcium channel blocker which binds to the alpha subunit of L-type voltage dependent calcium (Cav1) channels thereby blocking the influx of calcium ions into the host cell. While Verapamil is classically used to promote the relaxation of cardiac and smooth muscle cells, recent evidence has suggested that it may also function as an immunomodulator in astrocytes, hepatocytes, and T-cells. Further research has demonstrated that Verapamil is capable of specifically reducing Th2 associated inflammation in asthma. These findings raise the provocative question as to whether Verapamil could also be effective in reducing inflammation in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. | 10 |
| Control Placebo, capsules for oral administration, TID, for 8 weeks
Placebo: Capsule with the same characteristics (size, color, smell) as Verapamil HCl. | 10 |
| Open Label Verapamil HCl, capsules for oral administration, 80mg, TID, for 1 year
Verapamil HCl: Verapamil represents a calcium channel blocker which binds to the alpha subunit of L-type voltage dependent calcium (Cav1) channels thereby blocking the influx of calcium ions into the host cell. While Verapamil is classically used to promote the relaxation of cardiac and smooth muscle cells, recent evidence has suggested that it may also function as an immunomodulator in astrocytes, hepatocytes, and T-cells. Further research has demonstrated that Verapamil is capable of specifically reducing Th2 associated inflammation in asthma. These findings raise the provocative question as to whether Verapamil could also be effective in reducing inflammation in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. | 29 |
| Total | 49 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 | FG002 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Double-Blind Period | Lack of Efficacy | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Open Label Period | Lost to Follow-up | 0 | 0 | 11 |
| Open Label Period | Withdrawal by Subject | 0 | 0 | 8 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Treatment | Total | Open Label | Control |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 49.1 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.7 | 48.7 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.8 | 47.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.7 | 48.4 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.3 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants | 2 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 2 Participants | 4 Participants | 2 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 1 Participants | 4 Participants | 2 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 7 Participants | 39 Participants | 24 Participants | 8 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 10 participants | 49 participants | 29 participants | 10 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 4 Participants | 18 Participants | 10 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 6 Participants | 31 Participants | 19 Participants | 6 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk | EG002 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | — / — | — / — | — / — |
| other Total, other adverse events | 8 / 10 | 5 / 10 | 18 / 29 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 10 | 0 / 10 | 0 / 29 |
Outcome results
Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 100 A higher score indicates a worse outcome.
Time frame: baseline to week 56
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | Medicine Completers, baseline | 64.3 units on a scale | Standard Error 7.5 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | Medicine Completers, week 56 | 35.0 units on a scale | Standard Error 9.2 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | Surgical Completers, baseline | 90.0 units on a scale | Standard Error 5.8 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | Surgical Completers, week 12 | 16.7 units on a scale | Standard Error 6.7 |
Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 100 A higher score indicates a worse outcome.
Time frame: baseline to week 8
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | -44.03 units on a scale | Standard Error 7.66 |
| Control | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on 10cm Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) | -6.07 units on a scale | Standard Error 7.66 |
Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 110 A higher score indicates a worse outcome
Time frame: baseline to week 56
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | Medicine Completers, baseline | 31.8 units on a scale | Standard Error 5.24 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | Medicine Completers, week 56 | 24.14 units on a scale | Standard Error 6.17 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | Surgical Completers, baseline | 72.00 units on a scale | Standard Error 4.58 |
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | Surgical Completers, week 12 | 8.00 units on a scale | Standard Error 2.08 |
Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 110 A higher score indicates a worse outcome
Time frame: baseline to week 8
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | -27.3 units on a scale | Standard Error 7.52 |
| Control | Subjective Sinonasal Symptoms on Sinonasal Outcomes Test-22(SNOT-22) | 0.4 units on a scale | Standard Error 7.52 |
Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-Kennedy Score(LKS)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 12 Higher value represents worse outcome.
Time frame: baseline to week 8
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-Kennedy Score(LKS) | -1.3 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.63 |
| Control | Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-Kennedy Score(LKS) | -0.25 units on a scale | Standard Error 0.63 |
Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-McKay Score(LMS)
Minimum Score: 0 Maximum Score: 24 Higher value represents worse outcome.
Time frame: Week 8
Population: Intention-to-treat analysis
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-McKay Score(LMS) | 12.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.4 |
| Control | Objective Sinonasal Symptoms on Lund-McKay Score(LMS) | 17.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.9 |
Diastolic Blood Pressure
Time frame: Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Diastolic Blood Pressure | -0.6 mmHg | Standard Deviation 10.26 |
| Control | Diastolic Blood Pressure | 1 mmHg | Standard Deviation 7.85 |
Heart Rate
Time frame: Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Heart Rate | -1.4 beats per minute | Standard Deviation 9.16 |
| Control | Heart Rate | 4 beats per minute | Standard Deviation 30.37 |
Systolic Blood Pressure
Time frame: Mean change between baseline and week 8 measurements
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Systolic Blood Pressure | -4.5 mmHg | Standard Deviation 13.2 |
| Control | Systolic Blood Pressure | -6.6 mmHg | Standard Deviation 19.48 |