Skip to content

Managing Agitated Delirium With Neuroleptics and Anti-Epileptics as a Neuroleptic Sparing Strategy

Managing Agitated Delirium With Neuroleptics and Anti-Epileptics as a Neuroleptic Sparing Strategy

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05431595
Enrollment
42
Registered
2022-06-24
Start date
2022-07-19
Completion date
2027-02-02
Last updated
2025-11-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Delirium, Epileptics, Neuroleptics

Brief summary

To examine the effects of haloperidol, chlorpromazine, valproic acid and placebo, in conjunction with standardized non-pharmacologic interventions, in the first line treatment of agitated delirium in hospitalized patients with cancer. This double-blind, randomized clinical trial aims to provide evidence on various therapeutic options for palliating delirium, thereby reducing delirium-related distress and ultimately alleviating suffering.

Detailed description

Objectives: Primary objective: Compare the effect of scheduled haloperidol, chlorpromazine, valproate and placebo (non-pharmacological interventions alone) on the frequency of breakthrough restlessness over 72 hours in patients with agitated delirium seen by the palliative care consultation team. Our working hypothesis is that haloperidol, chlorpromazine, and valproate will lead to fewer episodes of breakthrough restlessness than placebo. Secondary Objective #1: Compare the effects of scheduled haloperidol, chlorpromazine, valproate and placebo on (1) RASS-PAL, (2) need for dose escalation, (3) perceived comfort by caregivers and bedside nurses, (4) delirium severity (Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale), (5) delirium-related distress in caregivers and nurses (Delirium Experience Questionnaire), (6) delirium recall in patients (Delirium Recall Questionnaire), (7) symptom expression (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale), (8) adverse effects, and (9) survival. Our working hypothesis is that haloperidol, chlorpromazine, and valproate are superior to placebo (non-pharmacologic interventions alone) in improving delirium-related outcomes. Secondary Objective #2: Estimate the efficacy of non-pharmacologic interventions alone on breakthrough restlessness. Our working hypothesis is that patients in the placebo group will require fewer breakthrough doses in the 72 hours after implementation of non-pharmacological interventions

Interventions

DRUGHaloperidol

Given by Vein (IV)

Given by Vein (IV)

DRUGValproate

Given by Vein (IV)

DRUGPlacebo

Given by Vein (IV)

Sponsors

Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas
CollaboratorOTHER
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. \[Patients\] Diagnosis of advanced cancer (defined as locally advanced, metastatic recurrent, or incurable disease) 2. \[Patients\] Seen by palliative care inpatient consultation team 3. \[Patients\] Delirium as per DSM-5 criteria 4. \[Patients\] Hyperactive or mixed delirium with either a rescue medication order or any non-pharmacologic measures (e.g. sitter, restraints) for agitation, restlessness, or delirium 5. \[Patients\] Age 18 years or older 6. \[Patients\] Permission from clinician from primary team to enroll 7. \[Family Caregivers\] Patient's spouse, adult child, sibling, parent, other relative, or significant other (defined by the patient as a partner) 8. \[Family Caregivers\] Age 18 years or older

Exclusion criteria

1. \[Patients\] On scheduled haloperidol \>4 mg/d, chlorpromazine \>100 mg/d, or valproate \>750 mg/d 2. \[Patients\] History of myasthenia gravis, acute narrow-angle glaucoma, or hepatic encephalopathy as documented in chart 3. \[Patients\] Hepatic dysfunction (unresolved AST or ALT \>2.5x ULN, bilirubin \>1.5x ULN or INR \>1.5 within past month) 4. \[Patients\] History of neuroleptic malignant syndrome as documented in chart 5. \[Patients\] Active seizure disorder within past month as documented in chart 6. \[Patients\] History of Parkinson's disease or dementia as documented in chart 7. \[Patients\] History of prolonged QTc interval (\>500 ms) if documented by most recent ECG within the past month 8. \[Patients\] Hypersensitivity to haloperidol, chlorpromazine, or valproate as documented in chart 9. \[Patients\] Pancreatitis within past month as documented in chart 10. \[Patients\] Currently on lamotrigine, phenobarbital, or carbamazepine 11. \[Patients\] Physical signs of impending death such as respiration with mandibular movement and death rattle 12. \[Patients\] Pregnancy as documented in chart 13. \[Patients\] Active COVID-19 infection as documented in chart

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale Questionnairethrough study completion, an average of 1 yearEdmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS)-score scale ranges from (0-10) No pain-0/Worse Possible Pain 10 (0-10)

Countries

United States

Contacts

Primary ContactDavid Hui, MD
dhui@mdanderson.org(713) 792-6258

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026