Lamotrigine Versus Valproate Monotherapy—Associated Weight Change in Adolescents With Epilepsy: Results From a Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

2003 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Biton ◽  
Paul Levisohn ◽  
Sheri Hoyler ◽  
Alain Vuong ◽  
Anne E. Hammer
2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srinivas Nalamachu, MD ◽  
Martin Hale, MD ◽  
Arif Khan, MD

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and tolerability of hydromorphone extended release (ER) in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP) with or without a neuropathic component.Design: This was a post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial using a randomized withdrawal design, performed in patients with moderate to severe chronic LBP. Patients achieving stable doses of hydromorphone ER during a 2- to 4-week conversion and titration phase were randomized to continue treatment with hydromorphone ER or taper-down to placebo during a 12-week double-blind phase. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean change in 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain intensity score from randomization to the final visit of the double-blind phase. Tolerability was assessed by recording adverse events (AEs). Data were analyzed separately for patients with non-neuropathic and neuropathic LBP.Results: A total of 173 patients with non-neuropathic/nociceptive LBP and 94 with neuropathic LBP were randomized into the double-blind phase. During the conversion and titration phase, mean (SD) NRS scores decreased significantly from 6.5 (1.87) and 6.4 (1.99) at screening to 3.3 (0.98) and 3.2 (1.05), respectively. For both LBP subgroups, patients randomized to hydromorphone ER maintained this improvement over the double-blind treatment period, whereas those randomized to placebo reported significant increase in NRS scores. Across subgroups, the incidence of 1 or more AE was 54 percent to 57 percent in the conversion and titration phase and 47 percent to 55 percent in the double-blind phase.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that hydromorphone ER is efficacious and generally well tolerated in the management of patients with non-neuropathic and neuropathic chronic LBP.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce H Chamberlain ◽  
Michelle Rhiner ◽  
Neal E Slatkin ◽  
Nancy Stambler ◽  
Robert J Israel

Aim: To evaluate methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in patients with and without cancer. Methods: This post hoc analysis comprises two Phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized studies of advanced-illness patients who received methylnaltrexone subcutaneous injection or placebo. Results: Significantly more patients treated with methylnaltrexone than placebo experienced laxation within 4 (cancer = 55.5 vs 15.5%; noncancer = 55.6 vs 12.8%) and 24 (cancer = 64.7 vs 29.8%; noncancer = 64.4 vs 30.8%) h after the first dose (p < 0.01 vs placebo). Regardless of cancer status, methylnaltrexone reduced median time to laxation and improved constipation relief without impacting opioid analgesia or withdrawal symptoms. Conclusion: Methylnaltrexone provided significant improvements in opioid-induced constipation over placebo in advanced-illness patients with and without cancer. Clinical trial registration numbers: study 301: NCT00401362; study 302: NCT00402038.


2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. S46-S47
Author(s):  
D. Baldwin

Pharmacological and psychological treatmentsThe findings of meta-analyses and randomized placebo-controlled treatment studies indicate that a range of approaches are efficacious in acute treatment. Pharmacological and psychological treatments, when delivered singly, have broadly similar efficacy in acute treatment. However, acute treatment with cognitive therapy (group or individual) may be associated with a reduced risk of symptomatic relapse at follow-up. Cognitive behaviour therapy is efficacious in adults and children: cognitive therapy appears superior to exposure therapy, but the evidence for the efficacy of social skills training is less strong. It is unlikely that the combination of pharmacological with psychological treatments is associated with greater overall efficacy than with either treatment, when given alone, as only 1 of 4 studies of the relative efficacy of combination treatment found evidence for superior efficacy.Efficacy and length of acute pharmacological treatmentAntidepressant drugs with proven efficacy include most SSRIs, the SNRI venlafaxine, the MAOI phenelzine and the RIMA moclobemide: the potential efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants is unknown. Some benzodiazepines and anticonvulsants and the antipsychotic olanzapine also appear efficacious in acute treatment. A number of small single-dose placebo-controlled crossover studies together suggest that beta-blockers can be beneficial in reducing anxiety symptoms in individuals with ‘performance anxiety’ (for example, when speaking in public), which overlaps with mild non-generalized social anxiety disorder. Acute treatment studies indicate that the proportion of responding patients increases steadily over time. A post-hoc analysis of the clinical trial database with paroxetine indicates that many non-responders to treatment at 8 weeks become responders with a further 4 weeks of double-blind treatment: however a post-hoc analysis of the clinical trial database for escitalopram indicates that response is unlikely if there is no onset of clinical effect within the first 4 weeks of treatment.Longer-term treatment and further treatment after non-responseThe findings of randomized placebo-controlled relapse prevention studies in patients who have responded to previous acute treatment reveal a significant advantage for staying on active medication (clonazepam, escitalopram, paroxetine, pregabalin, sertraline) for up to six months. Fixed-dose randomized controlled trials do not provide consistent evidence of a dose-response relationship with antidepressant drugs: but a fixed-dose study of pregabalin found that only the higher daily dosage was efficacious. A double-blind randomized controlled dosage escalation trial found no advantage for increasing to a higher daily dosage (of duloxetine), when compared to continuing treatment with a lower dosage. Switching between treatments with proven efficacy may be helpful. An uncontrolled study of augmentation of SSRI treatment with buspirone found some evidence of beneficial effects; but a placebo-controlled crossover-study of the augmentation of paroxetine with pindolol found no evidence of efficacy. A small placebo-controlled study of the augmentation of paroxetine with clonazepam found the combination was marginally short of superiority, when compared to paroxetine alone.Disclosure of interestThe author has not supplied his declaration of competing interest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document