BAER-101, a selective potentiator of α2- and α3-containing GABAA receptors, fully suppresses spontaneous cortical spike-wave discharges in Genetic Absence Epilepsy Rats from Strasbourg (GAERS).

BAER-101 (formerly AZD7325) is a selective partial potentiator of α2/3-containing γ-amino-butyric acid A receptors (GABAARs) and produces minimal sedation and dizziness. Antiseizure effects in models of Dravet and Fragile X Syndromes have been published. BAER-101 has been administered to over 700 healthy human volunteers and patients where it was found to be safe and well tolerated. To test the extent of the antiseizure activity of BAER-1010, we tested BAER-101 in the Genetic Absence Epilepsy Rats from Strasbourg (GAERS) model, a widely used and translationally relevant model. GAERS rats with recording electrodes bilaterally located over the frontal and parietal cortices were used. Electroencepholographic (EEG) signals in freely moving awake rats were analyzed for spike-wave discharges (SWDs). BAER-101 was administered orally at doses of 0.3-100 mg/kg and diazepam was used as a positive control using a cross-over protocol with a wash-out period between treatments. The number of SWDs was dose-dependently reduced by BAER-101 with 0.3 mg/kg being the minimally effective dose (MED). The duration of and total time in SWDs were also reduced by BAER-101. Concentrations of drug in plasma achieved an MED of 10.1 nM, exceeding the Ki for α2 or α3, but 23 times lower than the Ki for α5-GABAARs. No adverse events were observed up to a dose 300× MED. The data support the possibility of antiseizure efficacy without the side effects associated with other GABAAR subtypes. This is the first report of an α2/3-selective GABA PAM suppressing seizures in the GAERS model. The data encourage proceeding to test BAER-101 in patients with epilepsy.

Toward a Lifestyle Medicine Approach to Illness Anxiety Disorder (Formerly Hypochondriasis).

Lifestyle medicine may be the most effective way of treating illness anxiety disorder (IAD), formerly hypochondriasis. IAD as defined in the DSM-5 can now be diagnosed using positive symptoms, which means it is no longer a diagnosis of exclusion. Tools used in lifestyle medicine including motivational interviewing and mindfulness based stress reduction (MBSR) may be particularly useful in the management of IAD.

The Potential Role of Sensory Testing, Skin Biopsy, and Functional Brain Imaging as Biomarkers in Chronic Pain Clinical Trials: IMMPACT Considerations.

Valid and reliable biomarkers can play an important role in clinical trials as indicators of biological or pathogenic processes or as a signal of treatment response. Currently, there are no biomarkers for pain qualified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency for use in clinical trials. This article summarizes an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials meeting in which 3 potential biomarkers were discussed for use in the development of analgesic treatments: 1) sensory testing, 2) skin punch biopsy, and 3) brain imaging. The empirical evidence supporting the use of these tests is described within the context of the 4 categories of biomarkers: 1) diagnostic, 2) prognostic, 3) predictive, and 4) pharmacodynamic. Although sensory testing, skin punch biopsy, and brain imaging are promising tools for pain in clinical trials, additional evidence is needed to further support and standardize these tests for use as biomarkers in pain clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: The applicability of sensory testing, skin biopsy, and brain imaging as diagnostic, prognostic, predictive, and pharmacodynamic biomarkers for use in analgesic treatment trials is considered. Evidence in support of their use and outlining problems is presented, as well as a call for further standardization and demonstrations of validity and reliability.

Occupancy of Nociceptin/Orphanin FQ Peptide Receptors by the Antagonist LY2940094 in Rats and Healthy Human Subjects.

Therapeutic benefits from nociceptin opioid peptide receptor (NOP) antagonism were proposed for obesity, eating disorders, and depression. LY2940094 ([2-[4-[(2-chloro-4,4-difluoro-spiro[5H-thieno[2,3-c]pyran-7,4'-piperidine]-1'-yl)methyl]-3-methyl-pyrazol-1-yl]-3-pyridyl]methanol) is a novel, orally bioavailable, potent, and selective NOP antagonist. We studied NOP receptor occupancy (RO) after single oral LY2940094 doses in rat hypothalamus and human brain by use of liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) (LSN2810397) and positron emission tomography (PET) ([(11)C]NOP-1A) tracers, respectively. A bolus plus constant infusion tracer protocol with PET was employed in humans at 2.5 and 26.5 hours after administration of the LY2940094 dose. The RO was calculated from the change in regional distributional volume (VT) corrected for nondisplaceable volume using Lasson plots. The RO followed a simple Emax relationship to plasma LY2940094 concentration, reaching near complete occupancy in both species. For rat hypothalamus, the plasma concentration at half-maximum RO (EC50) was 5.8 ng/ml. In humans, LY2940094 was well tolerated and safe over the 4-40 mg dose range, and it peaked in plasma at 2 to 6 hours after a 1- to 2-hour lag, with approximate dose-proportional exposure. After 4-40 mg doses, NOP RO was similar across the prefrontal cortex, occipital cortex, putamen, and thalamus, with EC50 of 2.94 to 3.46 ng/ml, less than 2-fold lower than in rats. Over 4-40 mg doses, LY2940094 mean plasma levels at peak and 24 hours were 7.93-102 and 1.17-14.1 ng/ml, corresponding to the cross-region average NOP RO of 73%-97% and 28%-82%, respectively. The rat EC50 translates well to humans. LY2940094 readily penetrates the human brain, and a once-daily oral dose of 40 mg achieves sustainably high (>80%) NOP RO levels suitable for testing clinical efficacy.

Patient phenotyping in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.

There is tremendous interpatient variability in the response to analgesic therapy (even for efficacious treatments), which can be the source of great frustration in clinical practice. This has led to calls for "precision medicine" or personalized pain therapeutics (ie, empirically based algorithms that determine the optimal treatments, or treatment combinations, for individual patients) that would presumably improve both the clinical care of patients with pain and the success rates for putative analgesic drugs in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. However, before implementing this approach, the characteristics of individual patients or subgroups of patients that increase or decrease the response to a specific treatment need to be identified. The challenge is to identify the measurable phenotypic characteristics of patients that are most predictive of individual variation in analgesic treatment outcomes, and the measurement tools that are best suited to evaluate these characteristics. In this article, we present evidence on the most promising of these phenotypic characteristics for use in future research, including psychosocial factors, symptom characteristics, sleep patterns, responses to noxious stimulation, endogenous pain-modulatory processes, and response to pharmacologic challenge. We provide evidence-based recommendations for core phenotyping domains and recommend measures of each domain.

Results from clinical trials of a selective ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 (iGluR5) antagonist, LY5454694 tosylate, in 2 chronic pain conditions.

This article reports results of 2 studies investigating LY545694 in pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee and diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). Study I randomized patients to either of 2 doses of LY545694 or to placebo, and study II randomized patients to either of 3 doses of LY545694, to pregabalin, or to placebo. No significant differences between LY545694 groups and placebo were observed on the primary (average pain severity) or secondary efficacy measures in either study. Notably, study I lacked an active control, and, in study II, pregabalin, did not separate from placebo. Treatment-emergent nausea, vomiting, and dizziness were significantly more frequent in the LY545694 groups in both trials (P⩽.05), and significantly more LY545694-treated patients discontinued because of adverse events (P<.001). Steady-state concentrations of LY545694 were comparable in patients in both studies but were lower than exposures required for efficacy in animal models of pain behavior. Because the active control did not separate from placebo in the DPNP study, the study was potentially failed, rather than negative. Without an active control, it is unknown whether the OA study was negative or failed. Consequently, efficacy of selective ionotropic glutamate receptor antagonism in chronic pain conditions may warrant further investigation. Future trials should consider different pain conditions, contain a positive control with larger patient numbers per arm, and be conducted within a single region.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects on human experimental pain of the selective ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 (iGluR5) antagonist LY545694 in healthy volunteers.

The objective of this study was to establish in healthy volunteers the maximally tolerated multiple dose (MTMD) of the ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 antagonist LY545694 (part A), and to investigate whether that dose had analgesic or antihyperalgesic effects in the brief thermal stimulation (BTS) pain model (Part B). Part A was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 3 groups of 10 healthy men. To simulate an extended-release formulation, study drug was administered orally over 6hours (12 equally divided aliquots at 30-minute intervals). Part B was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, 3-way crossover study in 27 healthy men. At each of the 3 study periods, subjects received either LY545694 (MTMD; as determined during part A) as a simulated, twice daily extended-release formulation for 4 doses over 3days, gabapentin (600mg 8hours apart; 6 doses over 3days; positive control), or matching placebo. The BTS model was induced twice with a 1-hour interval on each of the 2 study days, before drug administration and at the time of expected peak analgesia of LY545694. Plasma exposure for LY545694 was approximately linear over the 25- to 75-mg dose range. The MTMD of LY545694 was 25mg twice daily. Areas of secondary hyperalgesia were significantly smaller after administration of LY545694 and gabapentin compared with placebo (P<.0001 and P=.0004, respectively), but there was no difference between areas after administration of gabapentin and LY545694 (P=.400). Neither gabapentin nor LY545694 reduced the painfulness of skin heating during BTS model induction. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was dizziness. The results of this study suggest that LY545694 should be explored further as a potential treatment for chronic pain involving neuronal sensitization.

Tailoring chronic pain treatments for the elderly: are we prepared for the challenge?

Chronic pain is increasingly recognized as a disease and accounts for substantial suffering and disability worldwide. The aging 'baby-boomer' generation is creating a tsunami of elderly patients (>65 years old) for global healthcare systems (between 2010 and 2030). The phenotypic expression of chronic pain in the elderly can be influenced by co-morbid diseases (e.g. diabetes, cancer, depression, Alzheimer's disease, etc.), changes in physiological competency (e.g. drug metabolism/elimination) or cognitive reserve. Will a shift in the drug discovery paradigm be required to improve efficacy, side-effects or positively impact quality of life (QoL) in the elderly with chronic pain? This review highlights a number of potential pitfalls that should be considered when delivering valued pain relief medicines tailored for the elderly.

Evaluation of patient-rated stiffness associated with fibromyalgia: a post-hoc analysis of 4 pooled, randomized clinical trials of duloxetine.

BACKGROUND: Patients with fibromyalgia (FM) rate stiffness as one of the most troublesome symptoms of the disorder. However, there are few published studies that have focused on better understanding the nature of stiffness in FM. OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of these analyses were to characterize the distribution of stiffness severity in patients at baseline, evaluate changes in stiffness after 12 weeks of treatment with duloxetine, and determine which outcomes were correlated with stiffness. METHODS: These were post-hoc analyses of 3-month data from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that assessed efficacy of duloxetine in adults with FM. Severity of stiffness was assessed by using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) on a scale from 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (most severe stiffness). The association between changes in stiffness and other measures was evaluated by using Pearson's correlation coefficient. The FIQ total score and items, the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-modified short form), the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Sheehan Disability Scale, the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, and the EuroQoL Questionnaire-5 Dimensions were evaluated in the correlation analyses. Stepwise linear regression was used to identify the variables that were most highly predictive of the changes in FIQ stiffness. RESULTS: The analysis included 1332 patients (mean age, 50.2 years; 94.7% female; and 87.8% white). The mean (SD) baseline FIQ stiffness score was 7.7 (2.0), and this score correlated with baseline BPI pain score and FIQ function. Duloxetine significantly improved the FIQ stiffness score compared with placebo (P < 0.001) and provided a moderate effect size (0.23 for the 60-mg dose and 0.38 for the 120-mg dose). Changes in stiffness were best correlated (range, 0.52-0.75; all, P < 0.001) with changes in BPI/FIQ pain and interference scores, FIQ nonrefreshing sleep, FIQ anxiety, 36-item Short-Form Health Survey bodily pain, and Sheehan Disability Scale total score. Variables related to severity of pain, pain interfering with daily activities, and physical functioning were predictors of change in stiffness. CONCLUSIONS: Stiffness scores were high in this population with FM and best correlated at baseline with BPI pain score and FIQ function. Not unexpectedly, improvement in stiffness with duloxetine correlated with many of the other markers of FM severity, presumably a result of amelioration in FM comorbidities.

Estimation of minimum clinically important difference for pain in fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for several pain measures obtained from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were pooled across 12-week treatment periods from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia. Each study enrolled subjects with American College of Rheumatology--defined fibromyalgia who presented with moderate to severe pain. The MCIDs for the BPI average pain item score and the BPI severity score (the mean of the BPI pain scale values: right now, average, least, and worst) were estimated by anchoring against the Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement scale. RESULTS: The anchor-based MCIDs for the BPI average pain item and severity scores were 2.1 and 2.2 points, respectively. These MCIDs correspond to 32.3% and 34.2% reductions from baseline in scores. CONCLUSION: In these analyses, the MCIDs for several pain measures obtained from the BPI were similar (∼2 points) and corresponded to a 30-35% improvement from baseline to end point. These findings may be beneficial for use in designing clinical trials in which the BPI is used to evaluate improvements in pain severity.

Efficacy of Duloxetine in Patients with Chronic Pain Conditions.

The primary objective of this study is to review the efficacy of duloxetine in treating chronic pain using the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations for clinical significance across chronic pain states. These include pain intensity, patient ratings of overall improvement, physical functioning, and mental functioning. This review comprised the side-by-side analyses of 12 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of duloxetine in patients with chronic pain (diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, chronic pain due to osteoarthritis, and chronic low back pain). Patients received duloxetine (60 to 120 mg/day) or placebo. Average pain reduction was assessed over 3 months as the primary efficacy outcome. Other measures used were physical function and Patient Global Impression of Improvement. In 10 of the 12 studies, statistically significant greater pain reduction was observed for duloxetine- compared with placebo-treated patients. The response rates based on average pain reduction, improvement of physical function, and global impression were comparable across all 4 chronic pain states. Compared with patients on placebo, significantly more patients treated with duloxetine reported a moderately important pain reduction (≥30% reduction) in 9 of the 12 studies, a minimally important improvement in physical function in 8 of the 12 studies, and a moderately important to substantial improvement in Patient Global Impression of Improvement rating in 11 of the 12 studies. The analyses reported here show that duloxetine is efficacious in treating chronic pain as demonstrated by significant improvement in pain intensity, physical functioning, and patient ratings of overall improvement.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of duloxetine for the treatment of chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in the treatment of chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: This was a 13-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients meeting American College of Rheumatology clinical and radiographic criteria for osteoarthritis of the knee. At baseline, patients were required to have a ≥ 4 weekly mean of the 24-hour average pain ratings. Patients were randomized to either duloxetine 60 mg once daily (QD) or placebo. At week 7, the duloxetine dosage was increased, in a blinded fashion, to 120-mg QD in patients reporting < 30% pain reduction. The primary efficacy measure was Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain. Secondary efficacy measures included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC); Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (CGI-S). Safety and tolerability was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the total (n = 256) patients, 111 (86.7%) in placebo group and 93 (72.7%) in duloxetine group completed the study. Patients treated with duloxetine had significantly (P ≤ 0.001) greater improvement at all time points on BPI average pain and had significantly greater improvement on BPI pain severity ratings (P ≤ 0.05), WOMAC total (P = 0.044) and physical functioning scores (P = 0.016), and CGI-S (P = 0.009) at the study endpoint. Frequency of treatment-emergent nausea, constipation, and hyperhidrosis were significantly higher in the duloxetine group (P ≤ 0.05). Significantly more duloxetine-treated patients discontinued the trial because of adverse events (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with duloxetine 60 mg to 120 mg QD was associated with significant pain reduction and improved function in patients with pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee.

Effect of duloxetine in patients with fibromyalgia: tiredness subgroups.

INTRODUCTION: This study tested the hypothesis that baseline ratings of fatigue/tiredness would be negatively associated with the efficacy of duloxetine on measures of pain and functional ability in patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of pooled data from 4 double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of duloxetine in fibromyalgia was performed. The fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ) tiredness item score (0 to 10 scale) was used to define tiredness subgroups. Patients were stratified into 3 subgroups: mild (0 to 3), moderate (4 to 6), and severe (7 to 10) tiredness. Analysis of covariance models and logistic regressions were used to test treatment-by-tiredness subgroup interactions. RESULTS: Data from the first 3 months are included in this post hoc analysis (duloxetine N = 797, placebo N = 535). At baseline, the distribution of tiredness severity in the duloxetine and placebo groups respectively was 3.64% and 3.75% mild, 16.71% and 15.57% moderate, and 79.65% and 80.68% severe. Rates of clinically significant (≥30% and ≥50%) improvement in brief pain inventory (BPI) average pain were similar across the tiredness subgroups. Tiredness severity at baseline was not negatively associated with the effects of duloxetine on patients' reports of functional ability using the FIQ total score, FIQ measures of physical impairment, interference with work, pain, stiffness, and depression and the medical outcomes study short form-36 (SF-36). CONCLUSIONS: Studies of duloxetine in fibromyalgia have demonstrated clinically significant improvements in pain and functional ability (FIQ, SF-36). This post hoc analysis of data shows that the efficacy of duloxetine among patients with fibromyalgia does not vary as a function of baseline ratings of fatigue/tiredness.

Maintenance of effect of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain: a 41-week uncontrolled, dose-blinded study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the maintenance of the effect of duloxetine in the treatment of chronic low back pain. METHODS: Patients (N = 181) with chronic low back pain entered a 41-week extension phase after completing a 13-week placebo-controlled treatment phase. The maintenance of the effect was assessed in patients taking duloxetine 60/120 mg/day who met the response criteria (> or = 30% reduction in Brief Pain Inventory average pain) at the end of the placebo-controlled phase. In addition, physical function was evaluated using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness, and the Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity and Interference ratings. Quality of life, safety, and tolerability outcomes were also assessed. Finally, placebo-treated patients were switched to duloxetine 60 mg/day at the beginning of the extension phase and their response to treatment is also reported. RESULTS: Initial responders to duloxetine treatment demonstrated further significant improvement (within-group) in pain, physical function, and quality of life. Significant within-group improvements were also observed in the extension phase for placebo-treated patients who were switched to duloxetine. Duloxetine was well tolerated with no new safety findings reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the analgesic effect of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain was not only maintained for 41 weeks, but additional statistically significant improvement in pain and function was observed.

Efficacy and safety of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Imbalance of serotonin and norepinephrine within modulatory pain pathways has been implicated in the development and maintenance of chronic pain. Duloxetine, a selective reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, has demonstrated clinical efficacy in 3 distinct chronic pain conditions: diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and chronic pain because of osteoarthritis. METHODS: In this randomized double-blind trial, adult nondepressed patients with a non-neuropathic CLBP and a weekly mean of the 24-hour average pain score>or=4 at baseline (0-10 scale) were treated with either duloxetine or placebo for 13 weeks. The dose of duloxetine during first 7 weeks was 60 mg once daily. At week 7, patients reporting<30% pain reduction had their dose increased to 120 mg. The primary outcome measure was the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain rating. Secondary measures included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire-24; Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement; Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S); BPI-Severity and -Interference (BPI-I); and weekly means of the 24-hour average pain, night pain, and worst pain scores from patient diaries. Quality-of-life, safety, and tolerability outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo-treated patients (least-squares mean change of -1.50), patients on duloxetine (least-squares mean change of -2.32) had a significantly greater reduction in the BPI 24-hour average pain from baseline to endpoint (P=0.004 at week 13). Additionally, the duloxetine group significantly improved on Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement; Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire-24; BPI-Severity and average BPI-Interference; weekly mean of the 24-hour average pain, night pain, and worst pain. Significantly more patients in the duloxetine group (13.9%) compared with placebo (5.8%) discontinued because of adverse events (P=0.047). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the duloxetine group included nausea, dry mouth, fatigue, diarrhea, hyperhidrosis, dizziness, and constipation. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine significantly reduced pain and improved functioning in patients with CLBP. The safety and tolerability were similar to those reported in earlier studies.

Research design considerations for confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

There has been an increase in the number of chronic pain clinical trials in which the treatments being evaluated did not differ significantly from placebo in the primary efficacy analyses despite previous research suggesting that efficacy could be expected. These findings could reflect a true lack of efficacy or methodological and other aspects of these trials that compromise the demonstration of efficacy. There is substantial variability among chronic pain clinical trials with respect to important research design considerations, and identifying and addressing any methodological weaknesses would enhance the likelihood of demonstrating the analgesic effects of new interventions. An IMMPACT consensus meeting was therefore convened to identify the critical research design considerations for confirmatory chronic pain trials and to make recommendations for their conduct. We present recommendations for the major components of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials, including participant selection, trial phases and duration, treatment groups and dosing regimens, and types of trials. Increased attention to and research on the methodological aspects of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials has the potential to enhance their assay sensitivity and ultimately provide more meaningful evaluations of treatments for chronic pain.

A phase II trial of talampanel in subjects with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Our objective was to determine if chronic treatment with the non-competitive AMPA antagonist talampanel is efficacious and safe in subjects with ALS. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of nine months treatment duration was conducted in 59 subjects with ALS, with 40 subjects receiving talampanel 50 mg p.o. t.i.d, and 19 subjects receiving placebo. Primary outcome measure was rate of decline in isometric arm strength (as measured by change in arm strength megaslope of the Tufts Quantitative Neuromuscular Exam (TQNE)). Other efficacy endpoints included rate of decline in respiratory function, isometric leg strength, bulbar function, fine motor function, the ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS), and survival. Secondary safety outcome measures were frequency of adverse events, neurological status, plasma concentration of talampanel, vital signs, routine laboratory tests, and electrocardiograms. Decline in muscle strength was 15% less in talampanel treated subjects, and decline in ALSFRS was 30% slower in talampanel treated subjects. Talampanel was safe in subjects with ALS. Mortality rates (8% talampanel, 5% placebo) and drug discontinuation rates (25% talampanel, 16% placebo) were similar in active treatment and placebo groups. Dizziness and somnolence occurred significantly more often in talampanel treated subjects. Although no efficacy measure reached statistical significance, there was a repeated trend toward slower decline in ALSFRS and isometric muscle strength in talampanel treated subjects. Talampanel was well tolerated in subjects with ALS. Although certain adverse events occurred more frequently in the active treatment group, the rate of subject drop-out after nine months did not exceed that seen in other trials. These findings provide strong support for a phase III trial to determine the efficacy of talampanel in subjects with ALS.

The clinical importance of changes in the 0 to 10 numeric rating scale for worst, least, and average pain intensity: analyses of data from clinical trials of duloxetine in pain disorders.

UNLABELLED: Data on 1,700 patients pooled from 5 randomized, placebo-controlled duloxetine studies (3 in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and 2 in fibromyalgia) were analyzed to determine clinically important differences (CIDs) in the 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale-Pain Intensity (NRS-PI) for patient-reported "worst" and "least" pain intensity while validating the previously published level for "average" pain. The correspondence between the baseline-to-endpoint raw and percentage change in the NRS-PI for the worst, least, and average pain were compared to patients' perceived improvements at endpoint as measured by the 7-point Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scales. Stratification by baseline pain separated the raw but not the percent change scores. The PGI-I category of "much better" or above was our a priori definition of a CID. Cutoff points for the NRS-PI change scores were determined using a receiver operator curve analysis. A consistent relationship between the worst and average NRS-PI percent change and the PGI-I was demonstrated regardless of the study, pain type, age, sex, or treatment group with a reduction of approximately 34%. The least pain item CID was slightly higher at 41%. Raw change CID cutoff points were approximately -2, -2.5 and -3 for least, average, and worst pain respectively. PERSPECTIVE: We determined an anchor-based value for the change in the worst, least, and average pain intensity items of the Brief Pain Inventory that best represents a clinically important difference. Our findings support a standard definition of a clinically important difference in clinical trials of chronic-pain therapies.

Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of duloxetine in the treatment of fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of duloxetine in patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: We report results from the 6-month extension phases of 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials having 6-month placebo-controlled phases. In Study 1, all patients received duloxetine 120 mg/d after 28 weeks on placebo or duloxetine 60 or 120 mg/d. In Study 2, patients taking placebo were titrated to duloxetine 60 mg/d after 27 weeks on treatment, while duloxetine-treated patients remained on their dosages of 60 or 120 mg/d. Safety and tolerability were assessed via discontinuation rates, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and changes in vital signs and laboratory measures. The primary efficacy measure was the Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity score. RESULTS: The percentage of patients entering and completing the extension phase was 56% (156/278) for Study 1 and 69% (140/204) for Study 2. Groups titrating from placebo to duloxetine showed the highest discontinuation rates due to an adverse event (Study 1, 25%; Study 2, 19%) and TEAE rates (Study 1, 82%; Study 2, 77%). The most common TEAEs were nausea and dry mouth. No significant within-group changes in blood pressure occurred in any group. Significant within-group mean increases in pulse (bpm) were observed in the placebo/duloxetine 120 mg group in Study 1 (3.7 [SD = 11.2], P

Efficacy of duloxetine in patients with fibromyalgia: pooled analysis of 4 placebo-controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of duloxetine in the treatment of pain and improvement in functional impairment and quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia from a pooled analysis of 4 placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trials. METHOD: Patients were eligible for inclusion in the studies if they were at least 18 years of age, met criteria for fibromyalgia as defined by the American College of Rheumatology, and had specified minimum pain severity scores. Across all studies, 797 patients received duloxetine 60-120 mg/d and 535 patients received placebo. Pain was assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain severity score; other efficacy measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S), Patient Global Impressions-Improvement scale (PGI-I), 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score, BPI pain interference items, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) mental and physical components. Changes from baseline to endpoint (last observation carried forward) for most of the above efficacy measures were analyzed using an analysis-of-covariance model. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of treatment, pain was significantly reduced in patients treated with duloxetine (P < .001) compared with placebo. In addition, duloxetine was superior to placebo in improving CGI-S (P < .001); PGI-I (P < .001); FIQ total (P < .001); HDRS-17 total (P = .003); SDS global functioning (P < .001), work/school (P = .018), and family life (P < .001); SF-36 mental (P < .001) and physical (P = .026) component; and BPI pain interference (P < .001) scores. Treatment-by-subgroup interactions were not significant for sex (P = .320), age (P = .362), or race (P = .180). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis provides evidence that 12 weeks of treatment with duloxetine 60-120 mg/d effectively improves fibromyalgia symptoms and may offer benefits beyond pain relief.