Pregabalin does not affect sperm production in healthy volunteers: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, noninferiority study.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the effects of pregabalin and placebo on sperm concentration in healthy male subjects. Changes in follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), testosterone, sperm motility, semen volume, and sperm morphology were also examined. METHODS: This was a phase 4, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, noninferiority study. A 12-week treatment period (placebo or 600 mg/day of pregabalin) was followed by a 1-week taper period and a 13-week washout period. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of subjects with a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in sperm concentration at End of Study. RESULTS: One hundred and nine subjects received placebo and 111 subjects received pregabalin. The difference between placebo and pregabalin with respect to the percentage of subjects with a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in sperm concentration at End of Study was 6% (95% CI: -2.29 to 14.3%). Noninferiority of pregabalin compared to placebo was declared as the upper bound of the 95% CI was less than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 20%. There were no significant differences between placebo and pregabalin groups with respect to their effects on FSH, testosterone, or sperm motility. Changes in semen volume and sperm morphology were numerically similar in both treatment groups. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin. Treatment with 600 mg/day pregabalin for 12 weeks does not adversely affect spermatogenesis or serum levels of FSH and testosterone in healthy males.

A randomized trial of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin for the treatment of central neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: Patients with chronic, below-level, neuropathic pain due to SCI were randomized to receive 150 to 600 mg/d pregabalin (n = 108) or matching placebo (n = 112) for 17 weeks. Pain was classified in relation to the neurologic level of injury, defined as the most caudal spinal cord segment with normal sensory and motor function, as above, at, or below level. The primary outcome measure was duration-adjusted average change in pain. Key secondary outcome measures included the change in mean pain score from baseline to end point, the percentage of patients with ≥30% reduction in mean pain score at end point, patient global impression of change scores at end point, and the change in mean pain-related sleep interference score from baseline to end point. Additional outcome measures included the medical outcomes study-sleep scale and the Hospital anxiety and depression scale. RESULTS: Pregabalin treatment resulted in statistically significant improvements over placebo for all primary and key secondary outcome measures. Significant pain improvement was evident as early as week 1 and was sustained throughout the treatment period. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin and were mostly mild to moderate in severity. Somnolence and dizziness were most frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that pregabalin is effective and well tolerated in patients with neuropathic pain due to SCI. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides class I evidence that pregabalin, 150 to 600 mg/d, is effective in reducing duration-adjusted average change in pain compared with baseline in patients with SCI over a 16-week period (p = 0.003, 95% confidence interval = -0.98, -0.20).

Adjunctive therapy with pregabalin in generalized anxiety disorder patients with partial response to SSRI or SNRI treatment.

This study evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive pregabalin versus placebo for treatment of patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) who had not optimally responded to previous or prospective monotherapies. This was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients diagnosed with GAD who had a historical and current lack of response to pharmacotherapy [Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) of ≥ 22 at screening] were randomized to adjunctive treatment with either pregabalin (150-600 mg/day) or placebo. The primary outcome measure was the change in HAM-A total scores after 8 weeks of combination treatment. Adverse events were regularly monitored. Randomized patients (N=356) were treated with pregabalin (n=180) or placebo (n=176). Mean baseline HAM-A scores were 20.7 and 21.4, respectively. After treatment, the mean change in HAM-A was significantly greater for pregabalin compared with placebo (-7.6 vs. -6.4, respectively; P<0.05). HAM-A responder rates (≥ 50% reduction) were significantly higher for pregabalin (47.5%) versus placebo (35.2%; P=0.0145). The time-to-sustained response favored pregabalin over placebo (P=0.014). Adverse events were consistent with previous studies and discontinuations were infrequent for pregabalin (4.4%) and placebo (2.3%). The study was discontinued early after an interim analysis. The results indicate that adjunctive pregabalin is an efficacious therapy for patients with GAD who experience an inadequate response to established treatments.

Efficacy and safety of pregabalin versus lamotrigine in patients with newly diagnosed partial seizures: a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Efficacious and safe monotherapy options are needed for adult patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. As an adjunctive treatment for partial seizures, pregabalin compares favourably with lamotrigine and is an effective, approved treatment. We studied the efficacy and safety of pregabalin as monotherapy, using a design that complied with European regulatory requirements and International League Against Epilepsy guidelines. METHODS: This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, non-inferiority study compared the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin and lamotrigine monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial seizures at 105 centres, mostly in Europe and Asia. Randomisation to treatment groups (1:1 ratio) was by a computer-generated pseudorandom code (random permuted blocks), with patients sequentially assigned numbers by telephone. Investigators, site staff, and patients were masked to the assigned treatment. After randomisation, patients were titrated to either 75 mg oral pregabalin or 50 mg oral lamotrigine twice daily during a 4-week dose-escalation phase, followed by a 52-week efficacy assessment phase during which the daily dose could be increased as needed to a maximum of 600 mg and 500 mg, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who remained seizure-free for 6 or more continuous months during the efficacy assessment phase; analysis included all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment groups and received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00280059. FINDINGS: 660 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (330 pregabalin, 330 lamotrigine), of whom 622 entered the efficacy assessment phase (314 pregabalin, 308 lamotrigine). Fewer patients in the pregabalin group than in the lamotrigine group became seizure-free for 6 or more continuous months (162 [52%] vs 209 [68%]; difference in proportion, -0·16, 95% CI -0·24 to -0·09). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between the groups and consistent with that in previous studies; dizziness (55 [17%] vs 45 [14%] patients), somnolence (29 [9%] vs 14 [4%]), fatigue (27 [8%] vs 19 [6%]), and weight increase (21 [6%] vs 7 [2%]) were numerically more common in the pregabalin group than in the lamotrigine group. INTERPRETATION: Pregabalin has similar tolerability but seems to have inferior efficacy to lamotrigine for the treatment of newly diagnosed partial seizures in adults. Inferior efficacy of pregabalin might have been attributable to limitations in the study design, as treatment doses might have not been optimised adequately or early enough. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.

Relief of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy with pregabalin: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

UNLABELLED: This was a 6-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy of pregabalin in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. Two hundred forty-six men and women with painful diabetic neuropathy received pregabalin (150 or 600 mg/day by mouth) or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was mean pain score at the end of treatment. Efficacy results indicate that pregabalin 600 mg/day significantly decreased mean pain score to 4.3 (vs 5.6 for placebo, P = .0002) and increased the proportion of patients who had a > or =50% decrease from baseline pain (39% vs 15% for placebo, P = .002). Pregabalin also significantly reduced sleep interference, past week and present pain intensity, sensory and affective pain scores, and bodily pain and decreased by > or =50% the number of patients describing their pain as gnawing, sickening, fearful, and punishing-cruel. More patients receiving pregabalin 600 mg/day than placebo showed improvement, as rated on the Clinical and Patient Global Impression of Change scales, 73% vs 45% and 85% vs 47%, respectively. Pregabalin 150 mg/day was essentially no different from placebo. Dizziness was the most common side effect. These study results show pregabalin 600 mg/day to be safe and effective in reducing the pain and other associated symptoms of painful diabetic neuropathy. PERSPECTIVE: Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy is a challenging neuropathic pain syndrome. This randomized controlled trial demonstrates that pregabalin, a new drug that interacts with the alpha2-delta protein subunit of the voltage-gated calcium channel, is an efficacious and safe treatment for the pain of this condition.

Pregabalin add-on treatment: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response study in adults with partial seizures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate pregabalin (PGB), 150 mg/day, and PGB, 600 mg/day, as an add-on treatment for patients with refractory partial seizures concurrently treated with one to three anticonvulsants (AEDs). METHODS: An international (13 countries), multicenter (45 centers), 12-week, double-blind, randomized study in which patients with partial seizures received placebo (n = 96); PGB, 150 mg/day (n = 99); or PGB, 600 mg/day (n = 92); given 3 times a day (t.i.d.). The primary efficacy criterion was reduction in seizure frequency during treatment as compared with baseline, as measured by RRatio, the symmetrical percentage change in seizure rates determined from daily seizure diaries. The RRatio between the 8-week baseline (pretreatment phase) and the 12-week treatment period were compared between each of the PGB groups and the placebo group by using an analysis of variance analysis of the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: PGB, 150 mg/day and 600 mg/day, were both significantly more effective than placebo in reducing the RRatio [-11.5 (p = 0.0007) and -31.4 (p < or = 0.0001), respectively, vs. 0.9]. These RRatio values correspond to seizure-frequency reductions from baseline of -1.8, 20.6, and 47.8% for placebo, 150 mg/day, and 600 mg/day, respectively. PGB efficacy was significantly dose related (p < or = 0.0001). Secondary efficacy variables corroborated the findings of the primary analysis. Significantly more patients were responders (> or =50% reduction in seizure frequency) in the PGB, 600 mg/day (43.5%), group than in the placebo group (6.2%) (p < or = 0.001). PGB was well tolerated. Dose-related, treatment-emergent adverse events (> or =10%), mostly mild or moderate in intensity, were somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, diplopia, and weight gain. The withdrawal rate due to adverse events was 10% of patients at 150 mg/day and 18.5% of patients at 600 mg/day, compared with 6.2% of patients receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS: PGB, 150 mg/day and 600 mg/day, is highly effective and well-tolerated add-on therapy in patients with partial seizures.