1 / 26

Proof-of-Concept Studies in Non-Neuropathic Pain

Proof-of-Concept Studies in Non-Neuropathic Pain. IMMPACT Meeting Washington, D.C. June 13, 2007. Nathaniel Katz, MD, MS, Analgesic Research, Needham, MA, USA. Key Questions. Can we do informative efficacy studies in small numbers of pain patients with non-neuropathic pain?

shauna
Télécharger la présentation

Proof-of-Concept Studies in Non-Neuropathic Pain

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proof-of-Concept Studies in Non-Neuropathic Pain IMMPACT Meeting Washington, D.C. June 13, 2007 Nathaniel Katz, MD, MS, Analgesic Research, Needham, MA, USA

  2. Key Questions • Can we do informative efficacy studies in small numbers of pain patients with non-neuropathic pain? • Can we demonstrate efficacy early? • How? What are some methodological features of successful studies?

  3. Patients Homogeneity of condition Training Enriched enrollment Pharmacogenomics Site issues How many Site training Study structure Crossover/parallel Treatment vs. withdrawal Duration Dosing Dose vs. concentration controlled Fixed, flexible, MTD Control groups Outcome assessment Cross-modality matching Composite endpoints Dense data capture Statistical approaches Address covariates Information-based designs Key Issues: ↑Δ/σ Max M, http://symptomresearch.nih.gov

  4. Literature Review: Early Onset • Randomized controlled trials in OA or RA • Superior efficacy against control demonstrated within 2 weeks • English language

  5. Results • Multiple studies (>20) readily identified • Studies fell into two rough groups: small early short crossover studies (1970s-1980s) and large parallel studies with early endpoints (1990s-2000s) • Interventions included NSAIDs, opioids, topicals, injections • Range of sample sizes: 19-1600 • Four studies had < 30 subjects • Several studies demonstrated efficacy within hours

  6. Can efficacy be demonstrated in POC studies in chronic visceral pain?

  7. Statistical significance of a κ-opioid agonist for chronic pancreatitis, n=6 Eisenach JC et al, Pain, 2003

  8. Does dense data capture of pain scores improve assay sensitivity?

  9. Table 3: Results of Analyses of Covariance (ANCOVA) based on Weekly Phone Check Data and Dense Data Capture in 19 Patients who used the LogPad, OraMorph vs. Naproxen Jamison et al, 1998; Shapiro et al, 2003

  10. Does assessment of evoked pain improve assay sensitivity?

  11. “Walking model” of knee OA pain • 530 patients with flared knee OA randomized to single doses of valdecoxib, rofecoxib, or placebo • Patients walked on treadmill multiple times over 6 hrs • Significant differences as early as 4 hrs Moskowitz et al, Osteoarthritis & Cartilage, 2006

  12. Do composite outcome measures have more assay sensitivity than single measures?

  13. Development of a responder index for LBP 5 clinical trials of celecoxib or valdecoxib vs. placebo pooled Combinations of VAS, PGA, and RMDQ explored for responsiveness Simon L et al, J Rheum, 2007

  14. Do multi-period within-patient crossover studies improve assay sensitivity?

  15. FBT for breakthrough LBP • Enriched enrollment, 9-period (6 active, 3 placebo) within-pt crossover design of 77 randomized pts (124 screened) of single doses of FBT vs. placebo • SPID60: FBT 8.3 (se=0.66) Plabebo 3.6 (se=0.57) p<0.0001 • 80% power achieved with 20 subjects Portenoy R, et al, CRMO, 2007

  16. Single-dose add-on design in mixed chronic pain?

  17. 3-period within-patient single-dose crossover design of dronabinol 10 or 20 mg vs. placebo in 30 pts with mixed chronic pain All pts continued opioid therapy TOTPAR8: 10 mg (p<0.05), 20 mg (p<0.01) Efficacy of Dronabinol as an Adjuvant Treatment for Chronic Pain Patients on Opioid Therapy Narang S et al, J Pain, 2008

  18. Accurate pain reporting Instrument Patient + Report • Validity • Reliability • Responsiveness

  19. Neuropsychological battery • Depression • Anxiety • Neuroticism • Somatization • Catastrophizing • Hypervigilance • Fear of Pain • Pain Attitudes • Expectation of pain relief • Hopefulness for pain relief • Quality of life • Social desirability • Locus of control

  20. Psychophysical assessment

  21. Accurate pain reporter Coefficient of Variation = 0.49 R2 = 0.82

  22. Inaccurate pain reporter Coefficient of Variation = 1.23 R2 = 0.53

  23. Forced choice thermal cross-modality matching: preliminary results • 28 subjects with knee OA underwent pain intensity assessment before and after a standard exercise intervention • 24 subjects reported pain “worse” and 4 “better” • Change in pain among the 24 “worse” subjects: • VAS: mean 0.43, sd 1.21, ses 0.36 • FCT: mean 2.17, sd 2.80, ses 0.78

  24. Composite endpoint of contemporaneously measured pain and physical activity • Comparison of pain-activity composites to pain and activity alone in knee OA patients • N=60, 1-wk crossover • Celecoxib vs. placebo • 135 patients with knee OA recruited at single site in 5 mo.

  25. Actogram Getting ready Preparing dinner Running In bed; reading Office work-desk Walking Sleeping Swimming Got up Office work-desk Couch sitting; reading Walking

  26. Conclusions • Small randomized controlled clinical trials can be successfully completed, at single sites, with demonstration of efficacy within a day, in a variety of chronic pain syndromes • Add-on designs and heterogeneous patients are possible • Attention must be paid to a number of methodological issues • Further research is needed to address specific methodologic questions

More Related