Study of Sulfasalazine in Treating Painful Neuropathy

July 26, 2018 updated by: Brian Wainger, Massachusetts General Hospital

A Single-center, Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Study to Evaluate the Effect of Sulfasalazine on Painful Neuropathy

The investigators hypothesize that sulfasalazine, an FDA-approved medication for rheumatoid arthritis and ulcerative colitis, may be beneficial in neuropathic pain conditions. In this study, the investigators will evaluate whether sulfasalazine improves pain due to painful peripheral neuropathy.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Terminated

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
8

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 2

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02114
        • Massachusetts General Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Painful neuropathy
  • Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument score of 3 or greater
  • no obvious alternative explanation for neuropathy
  • average baseline pain > 4/10

Exclusion Criteria:

  • other severe pain
  • anticipated difficulty weaning off medications
  • past or current psychiatric disorder as determined by Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview
  • medical contraindication to sulfasalazine
  • not proficient in English (due to heavy use of questionaires)
  • pregnant or breast feeding women

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: sulfasalazine
1 g oral twice daily for 2 weeks
Drug: Sulfasalazine
Placebo Comparator: placebo
oral placebo pill twice daily for two weeks.
Drug: placebo

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain Score (First Treatment Period)
Time Frame: second week of two week treatment period
Average pain score will be the average of daily pain scores (0-10) recorded by the subject in a pain diary during the second week of the two week treatment period. Higher scores are worse (0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine).
second week of two week treatment period

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain Score (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Average pain score will be the average of daily pain scores (0-10) recorded by the subject in a pain diary during the second week of the two week treatment period. Higher scores are worse (0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine).
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Number of Patients With >=50% Pain Reduction (First Treatment Period)
Time Frame: second week of two week treatment period
Average pain score will be the average of daily pain scores (0-10) recorded by the subject in a pain diary at baseline and during the second week of the two week treatment period. Higher scores are worse (0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine). Percent pain reduction will be calculated from BL to end of treatment period 1 (2 weeks), based on average pain scores at each time point.
second week of two week treatment period
Number of Patients With >=50% Pain Reduction (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Average pain score will be the average of daily pain scores (0-10) recorded by the subject in a pain diary during baseline and the second week of each of the two week treatment periods. Higher scores are worse (0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine). Percent pain reduction will be calculated from BL to end of treatment period 1 (2 weeks) and from end of treatment period 1 to end of treatment period 2 (2 weeks), based on average pain scores at each time point.
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Physical Functioning Score Assessed Using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Interference Scale (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
The BPI interference items are general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work (including housework), relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. The seven items are rated from 0 (pain does not interfere) to 10 (pain completely interferes).
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Physical Functioning Score Assessed Using the Euroquality of Life (EQ-5D) Metrics (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
The EQ-5D physical functioning items are mobility self-care, and usual activities. These three items are rated from 1 (no problems) to 5 (unable).
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Physical Functioning Score Assessed Using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Interference Scale (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
The BPI interference items are general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work (including housework), relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. The seven items are rated from 0 (pain does not interfere) to 10 (pain completely interferes).
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Physical Functioning Score Assessed Using the Euroquality of Life (EQ-5D) (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
The EQ-5D physical functioning items are mobility self-care, and usual activities. These three items are rated from 1 (no problems) to 5 (unable).
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Emotional Functioning (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Will be assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) total score. The BDI has 21 items, each scored 0-3. Higher values are worse. The total score is the sum of the 21 items and ranges from 0-63.
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Emotional Functioning (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Will be assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) total score. The BDI has 21 items, each scored 0-3. Higher values are worse. The total score is the sum of the 21 items and ranges from 0-63.
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Overall Improvement (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Will be assessed at end of two week treatment period
The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) reflects a patient's belief about the efficacy of treatment. Item 1 is as follows: Since beginning treatment at this clinic, how would you describe the change (if any) in ACTIVITY LIMITATIONS, SYMPTOMS, EMOTIONS, and OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE, related to your painful condition? (tick ONE box) (1=No change (or condition has gotten worse), 2=Almost the same, hardly any change at all, 3=A little better, but no noticeable change, 4=Somewhat better, but the change has not made any real difference, 5=Moderately better, and a slight but noticeable change, 6=Better, and a definite improvement that has made a real and worthwhile difference, 7=A great deal better, and a considerable improvement that has made all the difference). Item 2 is as follows: In a similar way, please circle the number below that matches your degree of change since beginning care at this clinic (0-10 scale): 0= Much better, 5= No change, 10= Much worse.
Will be assessed at end of two week treatment period
Overall Improvement (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Will be assessed at end of two week treatment period
The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) reflects a patient's belief about the efficacy of treatment. Item 1 is as follows: Since beginning treatment at this clinic, how would you describe the change (if any) in ACTIVITY LIMITATIONS, SYMPTOMS, EMOTIONS, and OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE, related to your painful condition? (tick ONE box) (1=No change (or condition has gotten worse), 2=Almost the same, hardly any change at all, 3=A little better, but no noticeable change, 4=Somewhat better, but the change has not made any real difference, 5=Moderately better, and a slight but noticeable change, 6=Better, and a definite improvement that has made a real and worthwhile difference, 7=A great deal better, and a considerable improvement that has made all the difference). Item 2 is as follows: In a similar way, please circle the number below that matches your degree of change since beginning care at this clinic (0-10 scale): 0= Much better, 5= No change, 10= Much worse.
Will be assessed at end of two week treatment period
Categorical Rating of Pain Intensity (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Assessed using number of days rated as none, mild, moderate, or severe in pain diary
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Categorical Rating of Pain Intensity (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Assessed using number of days rated as none, mild, moderate, or severe in pain diary
Assessed at end of two week treatment period
Breakthrough Treatment (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed during two week treatment period
Number of days breakthrough pain medication was taken
Assessed during two week treatment period
Breakthrough Treatment (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed during two week treatment period
Number of days breakthrough pain medication was taken
Assessed during two week treatment period
Missed Medication Dose (First Treatment Period Only)
Time Frame: Assessed during two week treatment period
Number of missed medication doses
Assessed during two week treatment period
Missed Medication Doses (Using the Crossover Comparison Structure of the Study)
Time Frame: Assessed during two week treatment period
Number of missed medication doses
Assessed during two week treatment period

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Massachusetts General Hospital

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Brian J Wainger, MD, PhD, Massachusetts General Hospital

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
May 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
August 10, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
August 10, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
August 14, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 16, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
August 17, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
August 22, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
July 26, 2018

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
July 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 2012-p-001443

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings