Ta strona została przetłumaczona automatycznie i dokładność tłumaczenia nie jest gwarantowana. Proszę odnieść się do angielska wersja za tekst źródłowy.

Study To Assess The Reproducibility And Sensitivity Of Quantitative Sensory Testing In Patients With Neuropathic Pain

11 kwietnia 2019 zaktualizowane przez: Pfizer

A Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled, 2-Way Crossover Methodology Study Designed To Assess The Reproducibility And Sensitivity Of Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) In Patients With Neuropathic Pain Treated With Pregabalin Vs Placebo

Conventional pain efficacy measures such as Visual Analogue Scores (VAS) are often unable to detect treatment efficacy in small-scale clinical trials. Combining conventional pain efficacy measures with quantitative sensory testing (QST) may provide more sensitive and informative outcome measures in clinical trials.

Przegląd badań

Status

Zakończony

Warunki

Interwencja / Leczenie

Szczegółowy opis

Methodology to assess reproducibility and sensitivity of quantitative sensory testing

Typ studiów

Interwencyjne

Zapisy (Rzeczywisty)

31

Faza

  • Nie dotyczy

Kontakty i lokalizacje

Ta sekcja zawiera dane kontaktowe osób prowadzących badanie oraz informacje o tym, gdzie badanie jest przeprowadzane.

Lokalizacje studiów

  • Austria
      • Vienna, Austria, A-1090
        • Pfizer Investigational Site
  • Belgia
      • Bruxelles, Belgia, 1070
        • Pfizer Investigational Site
  • Francja
      • Boulogne Billancourt, Francja, 92100
        • Pfizer Investigational Site
  • Zjednoczone Królestwo
      • Liverpool, Zjednoczone Królestwo, L9 7AL
        • Pfizer Investigational Site
      • London, Zjednoczone Królestwo, SW10 9NH
        • Pfizer Investigational Site

Kryteria uczestnictwa

Badacze szukają osób, które pasują do określonego opisu, zwanego kryteriami kwalifikacyjnymi. Niektóre przykłady tych kryteriów to ogólny stan zdrowia danej osoby lub wcześniejsze leczenie.

Kryteria kwalifikacji

Wiek uprawniający do nauki

18 lat i starsze (Dorosły, Starszy dorosły)

Akceptuje zdrowych ochotników

Nie

Płeć kwalifikująca się do nauki

Wszystko

Opis

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Neuropathic pain of peripheral origin demonstrating spontaneous ongoing pain and dynamic mechanical allodynia to brush stimuli.
  • A present pain intensity score of 4 or more (out of 10) for spontaneous ongoing pain and brush-evoked allodynia at the skin area at screen.
  • Stable analgesic medication (excluding pregabalin) for a minimum of 1 month prior to the start of study.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who have undergone neurolytic or neurosurgical therapy.
  • Patients who have trigeminal neuralgia, central pain (due to cerebrovascular lesions, multiple sclerosis and traumatic spinal cord injuries), complex regional pain syndrome (Type I and II), and phantom limb pain.
  • Patients who have previously been treated with pregabalin.

Plan studiów

Ta sekcja zawiera szczegółowe informacje na temat planu badania, w tym sposób zaprojektowania badania i jego pomiary.

Jak projektuje się badanie?

Szczegóły projektu

  • Główny cel: Inny
  • Przydział: Randomizowane
  • Model interwencyjny: Zadanie krzyżowe
  • Maskowanie: Podwójnie

Broń i interwencje

Grupa uczestników / Arm
Interwencja / Leczenie
Komparator placebo: Placebo
Lek: Placebo
BID dosing for 28 days
Aktywny komparator: Aktywny lek
Lek: Pregabalin
Dose titration according to following regimen: 75mg BID for 3 days; 150mg for 4 days; 225mg BID for 4 days; 300mg BID for 17 days. Dose reduced for renally impaired patients

Co mierzy badanie?

Podstawowe miary wyniku

Miara wyniku
Opis środka
Ramy czasowe
Mean Change From Baseline in Dynamic Allodynia Intensity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Five strokes applied with a standardized brush (somedic) across the painful site, 6cm long and at a control site to allow the participants to appreciate any difference. A painful and clearly dysaesthetic (unpleasant) sensation was considered as representing brush allodynia (whereas a "strange" or "tickly" sensation provoked by the brush was not). After each brush stimuli participants were asked to give a pain rating using 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 5 brush strokes was calculated to obtain the mean score.
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Dynamic Allodynia Area at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Dynamic area brush in cm^2: calculated from 8 measured distances by calculating the area of an octagon. The angle between each pair of lines was 45 degrees at point c. The area of the octagon was found by totaling the areas of the 8 triangles. Octagon with 8 radial lengths from center to the outside. Area = Σ ( ½ length * perpendicular height); Σ ( ½ ri * sin(45) r(i+1) ) = Σ ( (ri * r(i+1) )/2√2)). (where ri, i=1 to 8, were the eight radial lengths)
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Mechanical Pain Sensitivity (Von Frey) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Sensitivity to mechanical pain stimuli was tested using calibrated Von Frey monofilaments. To obtain a stimulus-response-function, seven different Von Frey monofilaments (size 8 to 512 mN, force increased by a factor of two from filament to filament) applied three times each; each stimulus was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. If a score of 8 or more was reported for a given intensity no stronger stimuli was applied. Von Frey stimulus was applied to the skin for 1 to 2 seconds. The average of 3 ratings was calculated for the mean score.
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Punctate Allodynia Area (Von Frey) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Punctate allodynia area in cm^2: calculated from 8 measured distances by calculating the area of an octagon. The angle between each pair of lines was 45 degrees at point c. The area of the octagon was found by totaling the areas of the 8 triangles. Octagon with 8 radial lengths from center to the outside. Area = Σ ( ½ length * perpendicular height); Σ ( ½ ri * sin(45) r(i+1) ) = Σ ( (ri * r(i+1) )/2√2)). (where ri, i=1 to 8, were the eight radial lengths)
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Cold Pain Sensitivity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Duration of thermal stimuli was 2 seconds and an intensity that is increased in steps of 5 degrees celsius for cold stimuli (between 5 and 20 degrees celsius). Thermal pain sensitivity was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 2 ratings was calculated to get the mean score.
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Heat Pain Sensitivity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Duration of thermal stimuli was 2 seconds and an intensity that is increased in steps of 4 degrees celsius for heat stimuli (between 40 and 50 degrees celsius). Thermal pain sensitivity was participant-rated using 11-point NRS where 0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable. The average of 2 ratings was calculated to get the mean score.
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period

Miary wyników drugorzędnych

Miara wyniku
Opis środka
Ramy czasowe
Mean Change From Baseline in Weekly Pain Score From the Daily Diary at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Daily pain diary: participant-rated pain during the past 24 hours rated on an 11 point NRS scale where 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain. For a given week, the pain response was the average of the 7 daily entries for that week, or average of the available data for that week if fewer than 7 entries were recorded (>=1 daily pain score for any given week required). The endpoint for each week consisted of the change from baseline in average pain score (follow-up value minus baseline).
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
PGIC: participant-rated assessment measuring change in participant's overall status on a 7-point scale from 1=very much improved to 7=very much worse.
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Test-Day Global Pain Intensity at Visits 3 and 6 and Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Global pain: participant-rated pain using the test-day global pain scale, consisting of an 11-point NRS where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain. Participants described intensity of pain in response to "How intense is your pain today?"
Week 3 (Visits 3 and 6) and Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
Mean Change From Baseline in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) Total Score at Visits 4 and 7
Ramy czasowe: Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period
NPSI: 10-item self-administered questionnaire assessing 5 dimensions of pain (burning superficial spontaneous pain, pressing deep spontaneous pain, paroxysmal pain, evoked pain, and paresthesia/dysesthesia). Each item consists of a question about the specific qualities of pain and an 11-point numerical scale range: 0 (absence of pain) to 10 (maximum intensity imaginable), and 2 temporal items related to spontaneous and paroxysmal pain. Maximum total score possible = 100.
Week 4 (Visits 4 and 7) of each period

Współpracownicy i badacze

Tutaj znajdziesz osoby i organizacje zaangażowane w to badanie.

Sponsor

Pfizer

Publikacje i pomocne linki

Osoba odpowiedzialna za wprowadzenie informacji o badaniu dobrowolnie udostępnia te publikacje. Mogą one dotyczyć wszystkiego, co jest związane z badaniem.

Przydatne linki

Daty zapisu na studia

Daty te śledzą postęp w przesyłaniu rekordów badań i podsumowań wyników do ClinicalTrials.gov. Zapisy badań i zgłoszone wyniki są przeglądane przez National Library of Medicine (NLM), aby upewnić się, że spełniają określone standardy kontroli jakości, zanim zostaną opublikowane na publicznej stronie internetowej.

Główne daty studiów

Rozpoczęcie studiów

1 grudnia 2006

Zakończenie podstawowe (Rzeczywisty)

1 września 2009

Ukończenie studiów (Rzeczywisty)

1 września 2009

Daty rejestracji na studia

Pierwszy przesłany

4 maja 2010

Pierwszy przesłany, który spełnia kryteria kontroli jakości

4 maja 2010

Pierwszy wysłany (Oszacować)

5 maja 2010

Aktualizacje rekordów badań

Ostatnia wysłana aktualizacja (Rzeczywisty)

23 kwietnia 2019

Ostatnia przesłana aktualizacja, która spełniała kryteria kontroli jakości

11 kwietnia 2019

Ostatnia weryfikacja

1 kwietnia 2019

Więcej informacji

Terminy związane z tym badaniem

Słowa kluczowe

Dodatkowe istotne warunki MeSH

Inne numery identyfikacyjne badania

  • A9011015

Te informacje zostały pobrane bezpośrednio ze strony internetowej clinicaltrials.gov bez żadnych zmian. Jeśli chcesz zmienić, usunąć lub zaktualizować dane swojego badania, skontaktuj się z register@clinicaltrials.gov. Gdy tylko zmiana zostanie wprowadzona na stronie clinicaltrials.gov, zostanie ona automatycznie zaktualizowana również na naszej stronie internetowej .

Subskrybuj