Efficacy and Safety of Trazodone and Gabapentin Fixed-Dose Combination in Patients Affected by Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: Randomized, Controlled, Dose-Finding Study.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1007/s40122-024-00624-3
Solomon Tesfaye, Ponnusamy Saravanan, Edvard Ehler, Karel Zinek, Ilona Palka-Kisielowska, Marcin Nastaj, Pierre Serusclat, Paola Lipone, Andrea Vergallo, Elisa Quarchioni, Fabrizio Calisti, Alessandro Comandini, Agnese Cattaneo
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Trazodone and Gabapentin Fixed-Dose Combination in Patients Affected by Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: Randomized, Controlled, Dose-Finding Study.","authors":"Solomon Tesfaye, Ponnusamy Saravanan, Edvard Ehler, Karel Zinek, Ilona Palka-Kisielowska, Marcin Nastaj, Pierre Serusclat, Paola Lipone, Andrea Vergallo, Elisa Quarchioni, Fabrizio Calisti, Alessandro Comandini, Agnese Cattaneo","doi":"10.1007/s40122-024-00624-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Up to 50% of diabetic patients with neuropathy suffer from chronic pain, namely painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), an unmet medical need with significant impact on quality of life. Gabapentin is widely used for PDN, albeit with frequent dose-limiting effects. Trazodone, an antidepressant with multi-modal action, has shown promising results when given at low doses as an add-on to gabapentin. Upon previous clinical trials and experimental evidence, a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of both compounds, at low doses, was developed for neuropathic pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo and reference controlled, dose-finding, multicenter, international, prospective study. Male and female diabetic patients aged 18-75 years and affected by PDN were eligible for enrolment. Patients were randomized (1:1:1:1:2 ratio) to trazodone and gabapentin (Trazo/Gaba) 2.5/25 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, gabapentin (Gaba), or placebo (PLB). The aim of the study was to collect preliminary information on the effect of the 3 different FDCs of Trazo/Gaba on pain intensity based on the 11-point numeric rating score (NRS) after 8 weeks of treatment. The secondary objectives were the evaluation of the percentage of responders, neuropathic pain symptoms, anxiety, sleep, quality of life, safety, and tolerability. The primary efficacy endpoint was evaluated with last observation carried out forward (LOCF), using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), including treatment and centers as factors and baseline as covariate and applying linear contrast test, excluding the active treatment. Only if the linear contrast test was significant (p < 0.05), the step-down Dunnett test would be used to determine the minimum effective dose significantly different from PLB. If linearity was not verified, an adjusted ANCOVA model and comparisons with Dunnett test were performed. Before the application of the ANCOVA model, the non-significance of interaction treatment per baseline was verified.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 240 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat (m-ITT) population: 39 in Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg, 38 in Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg, 37 in Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg, 83 in PLB, and 43 in Gaba. After 8 weeks of treatment, changes of the average daily pain score based on the 11-point NRS from baseline were - 2.52 ± 2.31 in Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg group, - 2.24 ± 1.96 in Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg group, - 2.46 ± 2.12 in Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg group, - 1.92 ± 2.21 in Gaba group, and - 2.02 ± 1.95 in the PLB group. The linear contrast test did not result in significant differences (p > 0.05) among treatment groups. Consequently, the minimum effective dose against PLB was not determined. The multiple comparison with Dunnett adjustment did not show any statistically significant differences vs. PLB after 8 weeks of treatment: Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg (95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.2739, 0.2026; p = 0.1539); Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg (95% CI - 0.9401, 0.5390; p = 0.5931); Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg (95% CI - 1.0342, 0.4582; p = 0.4471). However, patients receiving the lowest dose of Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg showed a statistically significant difference to PLB after 6 weeks of treatment (95% CI - 1.6648, - 0.2126; p = 0.0116). Positive results were also found for responder patients, other items related to the pain, anxiety, depression, sleep, and quality of life, consistently in favor to the lowest Trazo/Gaba FDC. Two serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred but were judged unrelated to the study treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mainly mild-to-moderate in intensity and involved primarily nervous system, gastrointestinal disorders, and investigations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The primary end point of the study was the change from baseline of the average daily pain score based on the 11-point NRS after 8 weeks of treatment. While the primary endpoint was not reached, patients treated with Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg t.i.d. showed statistically significant improvement of pain and other scores after 6 weeks and reported consistent better results in comparison to PLB on primary and secondary endpoints for the overall study duration. According to these results, the lowest dose of Trazo/Gaba FDC may be the best candidate for further clinical development to confirm the potential benefits of the FDC drug for this condition.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>NCT03749642.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"987-1006"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11255147/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-024-00624-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Up to 50% of diabetic patients with neuropathy suffer from chronic pain, namely painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), an unmet medical need with significant impact on quality of life. Gabapentin is widely used for PDN, albeit with frequent dose-limiting effects. Trazodone, an antidepressant with multi-modal action, has shown promising results when given at low doses as an add-on to gabapentin. Upon previous clinical trials and experimental evidence, a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of both compounds, at low doses, was developed for neuropathic pain.

Methods: This was a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo and reference controlled, dose-finding, multicenter, international, prospective study. Male and female diabetic patients aged 18-75 years and affected by PDN were eligible for enrolment. Patients were randomized (1:1:1:1:2 ratio) to trazodone and gabapentin (Trazo/Gaba) 2.5/25 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg t.i.d. for 8 weeks, gabapentin (Gaba), or placebo (PLB). The aim of the study was to collect preliminary information on the effect of the 3 different FDCs of Trazo/Gaba on pain intensity based on the 11-point numeric rating score (NRS) after 8 weeks of treatment. The secondary objectives were the evaluation of the percentage of responders, neuropathic pain symptoms, anxiety, sleep, quality of life, safety, and tolerability. The primary efficacy endpoint was evaluated with last observation carried out forward (LOCF), using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), including treatment and centers as factors and baseline as covariate and applying linear contrast test, excluding the active treatment. Only if the linear contrast test was significant (p < 0.05), the step-down Dunnett test would be used to determine the minimum effective dose significantly different from PLB. If linearity was not verified, an adjusted ANCOVA model and comparisons with Dunnett test were performed. Before the application of the ANCOVA model, the non-significance of interaction treatment per baseline was verified.

Results: A total of 240 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat (m-ITT) population: 39 in Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg, 38 in Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg, 37 in Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg, 83 in PLB, and 43 in Gaba. After 8 weeks of treatment, changes of the average daily pain score based on the 11-point NRS from baseline were - 2.52 ± 2.31 in Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg group, - 2.24 ± 1.96 in Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg group, - 2.46 ± 2.12 in Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg group, - 1.92 ± 2.21 in Gaba group, and - 2.02 ± 1.95 in the PLB group. The linear contrast test did not result in significant differences (p > 0.05) among treatment groups. Consequently, the minimum effective dose against PLB was not determined. The multiple comparison with Dunnett adjustment did not show any statistically significant differences vs. PLB after 8 weeks of treatment: Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg (95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.2739, 0.2026; p = 0.1539); Trazo/Gaba 5/50 mg (95% CI - 0.9401, 0.5390; p = 0.5931); Trazo/Gaba 10/100 mg (95% CI - 1.0342, 0.4582; p = 0.4471). However, patients receiving the lowest dose of Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg showed a statistically significant difference to PLB after 6 weeks of treatment (95% CI - 1.6648, - 0.2126; p = 0.0116). Positive results were also found for responder patients, other items related to the pain, anxiety, depression, sleep, and quality of life, consistently in favor to the lowest Trazo/Gaba FDC. Two serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred but were judged unrelated to the study treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mainly mild-to-moderate in intensity and involved primarily nervous system, gastrointestinal disorders, and investigations.

Conclusions: The primary end point of the study was the change from baseline of the average daily pain score based on the 11-point NRS after 8 weeks of treatment. While the primary endpoint was not reached, patients treated with Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 mg t.i.d. showed statistically significant improvement of pain and other scores after 6 weeks and reported consistent better results in comparison to PLB on primary and secondary endpoints for the overall study duration. According to these results, the lowest dose of Trazo/Gaba FDC may be the best candidate for further clinical development to confirm the potential benefits of the FDC drug for this condition.

Clinical trial registration: NCT03749642.

Abstract Image

曲唑酮和加巴喷丁固定剂量复方制剂对糖尿病痛性神经病变患者的疗效和安全性:随机对照剂量调查研究》。
导言:多达 50% 的糖尿病神经病变患者患有慢性疼痛,即糖尿病痛性神经病变 (PDN),这是一种尚未满足的医疗需求,对生活质量有重大影响。加巴喷丁被广泛用于治疗 PDN,但经常出现剂量限制效应。曲唑酮(Trazodone)是一种具有多模式作用的抗抑郁药,以小剂量作为加巴喷丁的辅助用药已显示出良好的效果。根据之前的临床试验和实验证据,我们开发出了这两种化合物的低剂量固定剂量复方制剂(FDC),用于治疗神经病理性疼痛:这是一项 II 期、随机、双盲、安慰剂和参照物对照、剂量调查、多中心、国际性、前瞻性研究。年龄在 18-75 岁之间、受 PDN 影响的男性和女性糖尿病患者均符合报名条件。患者被随机(1:1:1:1:1:2 的比例)分配到曲唑酮和加巴喷丁(Trazo/Gaba)2.5/25 毫克,每天三次,每次 8 周;曲唑/Gaba 5/50 毫克,每天三次,每次 8 周;曲唑/Gaba 10/100 毫克,每天三次,每次 8 周;加巴喷丁(Gaba)或安慰剂(PLB)。该研究的目的是收集3种不同的Trazo/Gaba FDCs在治疗8周后对疼痛强度(基于11点数字评分(NRS))影响的初步信息。次要目标是评估应答者比例、神经病理性疼痛症状、焦虑、睡眠、生活质量、安全性和耐受性。主要疗效终点的评估采用最后观察结果向前推移法(LOCF),使用协方差分析法(ANCOVA),将治疗和中心作为因子,基线作为协变量,并应用线性对比检验,排除积极治疗。只有当线性对比检验结果显著(P 结果)时,才会对其进行分析:共有 240 名患者被纳入改良意向治疗(m-ITT)人群:特拉佐/加巴 2.5/25 毫克 39 例、特拉佐/加巴 5/50 毫克 38 例、特拉佐/加巴 10/100 毫克 37 例、PLB 83 例、加巴 43 例。治疗8周后,基于11点NRS的每日平均疼痛评分与基线相比的变化情况为:Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25毫克组为- 2.52 ± 2.31,Trazo/Gaba 5/50毫克组为- 2.24 ± 1.96,Trazo/Gaba 10/100毫克组为- 2.46 ± 2.12,Gaba组为- 1.92 ± 2.21,PLB组为- 2.02 ± 1.95。线性对比试验结果表明,各治疗组之间没有显著差异(P > 0.05)。因此,未能确定对 PLB 的最小有效剂量。经过邓尼特调整的多重比较结果显示,治疗 8 周后,与 PLB 相比,各组间的差异无统计学意义:特拉佐/加巴 2.5/25 毫克(95% 置信区间 (CI) - 1.2739, 0.2026; p = 0.1539);特拉佐/加巴 5/50 毫克(95% 置信区间 (CI) - 0.9401, 0.5390; p = 0.5931);特拉佐/加巴 10/100 毫克(95% 置信区间 (CI) - 1.0342, 0.4582; p = 0.4471)。然而,接受最低剂量 Trazo/Gaba 2.5/25 毫克治疗的患者在治疗 6 周后与 PLB 相比有显著统计学差异(95% CI - 1.6648, - 0.2126; p = 0.0116)。在与疼痛、焦虑、抑郁、睡眠和生活质量相关的其他项目中,有反应的患者也发现了积极的结果,始终有利于最低特拉佐/加巴 FDC。发生了两例严重不良事件(SAE),但被判定与研究治疗无关。治疗突发不良事件(TEAEs)主要为轻度至中度,主要涉及神经系统、胃肠功能紊乱和检查:研究的主要终点是治疗 8 周后根据 11 点 NRS 得出的每日平均疼痛评分与基线相比的变化。虽然没有达到主要终点,但接受特拉佐/加巴 2.5/25 毫克(t.i.d.)治疗的患者在 6 周后疼痛和其他评分有了统计学意义上的显著改善,而且在整个研究期间,在主要终点和次要终点方面,与 PLB 相比都取得了更好的结果。根据这些结果,最低剂量的Trazo/Gaba FDC可能是进一步临床开发的最佳候选药物,以证实FDC药物治疗这种疾病的潜在疗效:临床试验注册:NCT03749642。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain and Therapy
Pain and Therapy CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
110
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信