A randomized, double-blind study of “Scrambler” therapy versus sham for painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9635-9635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby Christopher Campbell ◽  
Amit J Nimunkar ◽  
Janet Retseck ◽  
Jens C. Eickhoff ◽  
Miroslav Backonja ◽  
...  

9635 Background: CIPN is a debilitating, dose-limiting toxicity. The MC5A is a non-invasive electro-analgesia device delivering “Scrambler Therapy,” which has shown benefit for painful CIPN in uncontrolled studies. No sham-controlled trials of MC5A have been performed. Methods: Eligible patients included adults with neuropathic pain (NP) for > 6 months, pain scores ≥4/10 numerical rating scale (NRS), and no history of diabetes or other peripheral neuropathies. Patients received up to 10 daily sessions of 50 minutes with either MC5A or a novel active sham device constructed to deliver a just perceptible electrical sensation. Sham output is neither a TENS nor MC5A and is designed to be nontherapeutic. Active and sham treatments were applied to the affected limbs. 14 patients were randomized with no baseline differences. Patients and evaluators were blinded to study arm. Pain was measured before, daily during, after and 3 months post-treatment (verbal NRS). The primary endpoint was change in pain. Secondary endpoints included quantitative neurosensory testing (QST), validated patient-report measures, and cytokines. Results: There were 7 patients in each arm. The table shows changes in pain scores pre- and post-treatment by day and group. There was no difference between arms and no arm x day interaction. There was no significant day or arm effect for the function sub scales. Conclusions: In a small pilot study, MC5A was not significantly different from sham therapy for the primary outcome. The sham is feasible and provides a mechanism for future controlled studies with MC5A. Secondary endpoints, e.g. QST are forthcoming. Clinical trial information: NCT01261780. [Table: see text]

Pain Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 326-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Oka ◽  
Kenji Miki ◽  
Iwao Kishita ◽  
David F Kong ◽  
Takahiro Uchida

Abstract Objectives Existing treatments for fibromyalgia have limited efficacy, and only a minority of individuals clinically respond to any single intervention. This study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility of alternating magnetic field therapy in fibromyalgia patients by comparing the Angel Touch device (AT-02) with a sham control (S-01). Methods Two sites enrolled 44 subjects with diagnosed fibromyalgia. After informed consent, subjects taking prohibited concomitant drugs underwent a washout period of two or more weeks. All subjects then began a one-week run-in period. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores were collected without device intervention for one day, followed by S-01 application to four or more painful sites for 10 minutes at each site, twice daily for six days. Subjects were then randomized to AT-02 or S-01, applied to four or more painful sites for 10 minutes at each site, twice daily for eight weeks. NRS scores were obtained twice daily during the entire treatment period. Results The primary end point (change in NRS ± SD at week 8 vs baseline) was –0.94 ± 1.33 in the AT-02 group and –0.22 ± 1.38 in the S-01 group. A trend toward a between-group difference in eight-week NRS scores favored the AT-02 group (–0.73, 95% confidence interval = –1.56 to 0.11, P = 0.086). An adjusted repeated measure analysis detected a significant difference in NRS scores (P = 0.039). Conclusions The reduction in NRS scores for AT-02 relative to sham was comparable to reductions observed in meta-analyses of fibromyalgia drug therapy. The unadjusted results and the persistence of the pain score reductions remain encouraging.


2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Despoina Kakagia ◽  
Theodosia Vogiatzaki ◽  
Savvas Eleftheriadis ◽  
Gregory Trypsiannis ◽  
Christos Iatrou

Background: In this double-blind, randomized study, the efficacy of tramadol, an atypical opioid, was tested versus lidocaine in excision of cutaneous lesions of the face. Methods: Eighty-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive either 2 mg/kg tramadol 2% plus adrenaline 1:200,000 (group T, n = 46) or 3 mg/kg lidocaine 2% plus adrenaline 1:200,000 (group L, n = 42) for excision of cutaneous lesions. Pain at the injection site, 2 and 20 minutes postinjection and 3, 6, and 12 hours postoperatively, was monitored on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale (NRS). Irritation at the injection point and the duration of postoperative analgesia were also recorded. Results: There were no significant differences in demographic data, topography, size of the lesions removed, and operative time between the two groups. A tendency toward lower injection NRS pain scores was observed in group L compared to group T (p = .064). No statistically significant differences between the two groups were found at 2 and 20 minutes postinjection (p = .741 and p = .142, respectively); however, pain scores were significantly higher in group L at 3, 6, and 12 hours postoperatively (all p < .001). Erythema at the injection site was observed in nine group T and two group L patients (p = .076). No postoperative analgesics were required in the tramadol group of patients, whereas acetaminophen with or without codeine was administered in all but five lidocaine group patients during the first 12 hours. Conclusion: Tramadol may be used as a reliable local anesthetic agent, providing longer postoperative analgesia compared to lidocaine; however, it bears a higher incidence of irritation at the injection site.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii178-ii178
Author(s):  
Neal Prakash ◽  
Rachel Tran ◽  
Elizabeth Strain

Abstract BACKGROUND Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and serious consequence of cancer treatment that, for up to 30% of patients, persists beyond six months of completing chemotherapy. Scrambler therapy (ST) is a therapeutic modality with emerging evidence supporting its ability to diminish CIPN symptoms. METHODS Data was from a convenience sample of 24 CIPN patients (with symptoms between 1-240 months after platinum-based, taxane, or combination chemotherapy) completing 10 sessions of ST using the Calmare® device in the City of Hope Outpatient Physical Therapy Department. Patients were treated for ~45 minutes per session over 10 sessions. Patients received a standardized assessment pre- and post ST that included: EORTC chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy questionnaire (QLQ-CIPN20), mono-filament testing, pain intensity numerical rating scale, numbness scale, extensor hallicus longus strength, Timed Up and Go, Romberg, and single leg balance. RESULTS Regardless of length of symptoms, significant changes were seen in post-treatment assessment of quality of life as measured by the QLQ-CIPN-20 and numbness scale. Post-treatment QLQ-CIPN-20 total scores decreased by an average of 7.1 points (n= 24, p&lt; .01). Numbness in the left lower extremity decreased by an average of 1 point of the 0-4 point scale (n=24, p=.0007) and 1.09 points on the right lower extremity (n=24, p &lt; .0004). There was a trend towards improvements in pain, monofilament testing, single leg balance, and Romberg test, though they did not reach a level of significance. Surprisingly, only 3 of 24 patients reported pain related to their CIPN at the start of treatment. CONCLUSION For patients with CIPN, scrambler therapy improves numbness and improves quality of life measures. This suggests an important role for this treatment modality in cancer patients suffering from this debilitating condition.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 183-183
Author(s):  
Ethan M. Basch ◽  
Johann Sebastian De Bono ◽  
Howard I. Scher ◽  
Arturo Molina ◽  
Cora N. Sternberg ◽  
...  

183 Background: In study COU-AA-301, the androgen biosynthesis inhibitor AA significantly increased overall survival in mCRPC post-docetaxel (D) in both interim and updated analyses at 552 and 775 events, respectively. Interim data also showed a significant benefit of AA on patient (pt) reported pain. We present long-term outcomes of the effect of AA on pain and SREs. Methods: In this international randomized double blind study of AA (1 g QD) + prednisone (P) (5 mg BID) vs placebo + P in mCRPC post-D, pain was assessed at baseline and each treatment cycle until treatment discontinuation using the BPI-SF questionnaire. Palliation/progression of pain intensity (P-INT) and pain interference (P-INF) were evaluated using a priori definitions. P-INT palliation was defined as ≥ 30% improvement in pt reported “worst pain in last 24 h” (on 0-10 numerical rating scale) durable for ≥ 28 d without increased analgesic use (by WHO criteria) in eligible pts (those with significant baseline pain). Conversely, P-INT progression was defined as ≥ 30% deterioration, or increased analgesic use, over ≥ 28 d. Results: 797 pts were randomized to AA + P, 398 to placebo + P. Median follow-up was 20.2 mos. Median time to SRE was 25.0 mos (AA + P) vs 20.3 mos (placebo + P), p = 0.0001. Pain data were available for most patients; the cumulative amount of missing data ranged from 5% at Cycle 1 to 7% at Cycle 20. AA + P improved P-INT outcomes (Table); P-INF benefits were similar and also highly significant. Conclusions: Benefits of AA + P observed in the interim analysis, including superior and more durable pain relief and delay of pain progression and SREs, were maintained with longer follow-up. Additional analyses of the potential relationships between pain/SREs and other outcomes, as well as of prednisone’s effect on pain palliation in the control arm, are ongoing. [Table: see text]


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Marzo-Ortega ◽  
Chiara Perella ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Agnieszka Zielińska ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  SKIPPAIN (NCT03136861) is the first randomised controlled study involving a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, with a primary endpoint of spinal pain at Week 8 in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; ankylosing spondylitis [AS] and non-radiographic [nr]-axSpA). We present the 24-week results of secukinumab in reducing spinal pain and disease activity following step-up dosing. Methods  This double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3b study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with active disease (BASDAI ≥4; average spinal pain numerical rating scale [NRS] score &gt;4 at baseline; inadequate response to ≥ 2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥4 weeks). Patients were randomised (3:1) to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4. At Week 8, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 150 or 300 mg Q4W. Patients originally randomised to secukinumab 150 mg were classified as responders or non-responders (spinal pain NRS score &lt;4 or ≥ 4, respectively) at Week 8. Responders were re-assigned to continue doubleblind secukinumab 150 mg Q4W (Arm A1). Non-responders were re-randomised to double-blind secukinumab 150 mg (Arm A2) or a step-up dose of 300 mg (Arm A3) Q4W. Treatment was up to Week 24. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients achieving an average spinal pain score &lt;4 on a 0-10 NRS with secukinumab vs placebo at Week 8. Results  380 axSpA patients (269/380 [70.8%] AS; 111/380 [29.2%] nr-axSpA) were randomised to secukinumab 150 mg (N = 285) or placebo (N = 95). The primary endpoint was met (proportion of spinal pain NRS [average] score responders: 32% vs 20%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.9 [1.1-3.3] favouring secukinumab vs placebo; P &lt; 0.05). Further reductions in spinal pain occurred at Week 24, especially in those initially randomised to placebo and switched to active drug. Pronounced improvements were observed in other disease activity measurements (Table 1). Numerically, more patients achieved ASDAS low disease activity at Week 24 post-secukinumab dose escalation (Arm A3) vs those remaining on the same dose (Arm A2). Conclusion  Secukinumab provided rapid, significant improvement in spinal pain and led to low disease activity in axSpA patients. Secukinumab dose escalation might be beneficial for patients not responding fully to the starting dose. P188 Table 1:Spinal pain and ASDAS-CRP scores at Weeks 8 and 24Week 8SEC 150 mg (N = 285)PBO (N = 95)Change from baseline in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-2.6 (2.5) [279]-1.5 (2.2) [92]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-1.2 (1.0) [271]-0.5 (0.8) [89]Week 24Active treatment group (SEC treatment starting at baseline)PBO switchers group (SEC treatment starting at Week 8)Arm A1 (SEC 150 R-150) N = 90Arm A2 (SEC 150 NR-150) N = 94Arm A3 (SEC 150 NR-300) N = 94Arm B1 (PBO-SEC 150) N = 45Arm B2 (PBO-SEC 300) N = 44Change from Week 8 in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-0.4 (1.5) [88]-2.1 (2.2) [93]-1.9 (2.2) [91]-2.5 (2.6) [45]-2.9 (2.6) [43]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-2.2 (1.0) [86]-1.2 (1.0) [93]-1.5 (1.0) [92]-1.5 (1.1) [44]-1.8 (0.9) [43]Arm A1=SEC responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 R-150); Arm A2=SEC non-responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-150); Arm A3=SEC non-responder to SEC 300 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-300); Arm B1=Placebo patients to SEC 150 mg (PBO-SEC 150); Arm B2=Placebo patients to SEC 300 mg (PBO-SEC 300). ASDAS-CRP, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein; N, total number of patients randomised; n, number of evaluable patients; NR, non-responders; NRS, numerical rating scale; PBO, placebo; R, responders; SD, standard deviation; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  H. Marzo-Ortega: Consultancies; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. C. Perella: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. D. Poddubnyy: Consultancies; Consultant/speaker for: AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. E. Pournara: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. A. Zielińska: Consultancies; Novartis, Pfizer. A. Baranauskaite: Consultancies; AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, KRKA. S. Sadhu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. B. Schulz: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. M. Rissler: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Gi Min ◽  
Hyun Seok Baek ◽  
Kyoung-Min Lee ◽  
Yoon-Ho Hong

AbstractScrambler therapy is a noninvasive electroanalgesia technique designed to remodulate the pain system. Despite growing evidence of its efficacy in patients with neuropathic pain, little is known about the clinical factors associated with treatment outcome. We conducted a prospective, open-label, single-arm trial to assess the efficacy and safety of scrambler therapy in patients with chronic neuropathic pain of various etiologies. A post-hoc analysis was performed to investigate whether cluster analysis of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) profiles could identify a subgroup of patients regarding neuropathic pain phenotype and treatment outcome. Scrambler therapy resulted in a significant decrease in the pain numerical rating scale (NRS) score over 2 weeks of treatment (least squares mean of percentage change from baseline, − 15%; 95% CI − 28% to − 2.4%; p < 0.001). The mean score of Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference subdimension was also significantly improved (p = 0.022), while the BPI pain composite score was not. Hierarchical clustering based on the NPSI profiles partitioned the patients into 3 clusters with distinct neuropathic pain phenotypes. Linear mixed-effects model analyses revealed differential response to scrambler therapy across clusters (p = 0.003, pain NRS; p = 0.072, BPI interference subdimension). Treatment response to scrambler therapy appears different depending on the neuropathic pain phenotypes, with more favorable outcomes in patients with preferentially paroxysmal pain rather than persistent pain. Further studies are warranted to confirm that capturing neuropathic pain phenotypes can optimize the use of scrambler therapy.


1994 ◽  
Vol 165 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher F. Fear ◽  
Carl S. Littlejohns ◽  
Eryl Rouse ◽  
Paul McQuail

BackgroundThe induction agent propofol is known to reduce electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) seizure duration. It is assumed that outcome from depression is adversely affected by this agent. This study compares propofol and methohexitone as induction agents for ECT.MethodIn a prospective, randomised, double-blind study 20 subjects with major depressive disorder (DSM-III-R criteria) received propofol or methohexitone anaesthesia. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Beck Depression Inventory were used to assess depression before therapy, at every third treatment, and at the end of therapy. Seizure duration was measured using the cuff technique.ResultsMean seizure durations (P < 0.01) and mean total seizure duration (P < 0.01) were shorter in the propofol group. There was no difference in outcome.ConclusionsUse of propofol may not adversely affect outcome from depression and it is not necessarily contraindicated as an induction agent for ECT. Our results should be interpreted cautiously, and larger studies are needed.


2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. K. Thillemann ◽  
T. M. Thillemann ◽  
B. Munk ◽  
K. Krøner

We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 42 Motec thumb carpometacarpal total joint arthroplasties. The primary endpoint was revision with implant removal and trapeziectomy. At follow-up the disability of the arm shoulder and hand (DASH) score, pain on numerical rating scale at rest and with activity and serum chrome and cobalt concentrations were assessed for both unrevised and revised patients. At a mean follow-up of 26 months, 17 patients had been revised. The 2 year cumulative revision rate was 42% (95% CI, 28–60%). The DASH score and pain scores at rest and with activity were comparable between the patients whose thumbs remained unrevised and those revised. Patients with elevated serum chrome and cobalt levels had significantly higher DASH and pain scores, but elevated levels were not associated with revision. The revision rate in this study is unacceptably high. However, pain and DASH scores after revision are acceptable and comparable with patients with non-revised implants. Level of evidence: IV


2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Richard Mwase ◽  
Tonny Stone Luggya ◽  
John Mark Kasumba ◽  
Humphrey Wanzira ◽  
Andrew Kintu ◽  
...  

Background. Good postoperative analgesic management improves maternal satisfaction and care of the neonate. Postoperative pain management is a challenge in Mulago Hospital, yet ketamine is accessible and has proven benefit. We determined ketamine’s postoperative analgesic effects.Materials and Methods. We did an RCT among consenting parturients that were randomized to receive either intravenous ketamine (0.25 mg/kg) or placebo after spinal anesthetic. Pain was assessed every 30 mins up to 24 hours postoperatively using the numerical rating scale. The first complaint of pain requiring treatment was noted as “time to first breakthrough pain.”Results. We screened 100 patients and recruited 88 that were randomized into two arms of 44 patients that received either ketamine or placebo. Ketamine group had 30-minute longer time to first breakthrough pain and lower 24-hour pain scores. Postoperative diclofenac consumption was lesser in the ketamine group compared to placebo and Kaplan-Meier graphs showed a higher probability of experiencing breakthrough pain earlier in the placebo group.Conclusion. Preincision intravenous ketamine (0.25 mg/kg) offered 30-minute prolongation to postoperative analgesia requirement with reduced 24-hour pain scores. We recommend larger studies to explore this benefit. This trial is registered with Pan African Clinical Trial Registry numberPACTR201404000807178.


2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 450-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vandana S. Mathur ◽  
Jayant Kumar ◽  
Paul W. Crawford ◽  
Howard Hait ◽  
Thomas Sciascia ◽  
...  

Background: Pruritus is a distressing hallmark of the uremic condition, affecting approximately 60% of hemodialysis patients. Abnormal endogenous opioid ligand activity at μ and κ-opioid receptors has been postulated as a mechanism in uremic pruritus. Nalbuphine is a μ-opioid antagonist and κ-opioid agonist. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 373 hemodialysis patients with moderate or severe uremic pruritus were randomized in a 1: 1:1 ratio to nalbuphine extended-release tablets 120 mg (NAL 120), 60 mg (NAL 60), or placebo and treated for 8 weeks. Three hundred seventy-one were analyzed for efficacy. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to treatment weeks 7 and 8 in itching intensity on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS, 0 [no itching]; 10 [worst possible itching]) using an intent-to-treat approach. The aim was to evaluate the safety and antipruritic efficacy of NAL. Results: The mean duration of itching was 3.2 years. From a baseline NRS of 6.9 (1.5), the mean NRS declined by 3.5 (2.4) and by 2.8 (2.2) in NAL 120 mg and the placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.017). There was no evidence of tolerance. A trend for less sleep disruption due to itching (p = 0.062, NAL 120 vs. placebo) was also observed. There were no significant differences between NAL 60 vs. placebo. Serious adverse events occurred in 6.7, 12.7, and 15.4% in the NAL 120, NAL 60, and placebo groups respectively. Conclusions: In this largest-to-date randomized controlled trial in uremic pruritus, NAL 120 durably and significantly reduced the itching intensity among hemodialysis patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document