Primary studies included in this broad synthesis

loading
4 articles (4 References) loading Revert Studify

Primary study

Unclassified

Journal Diabetes care
Year 2010
Loading references information
OBJECTIVE - To evaluate efficacy and safety of lacosamide compared with placebo in painful diabetic polyneuropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Diabetic patients with at least moderate neuropathic pain were randomized to placebo or lacosamide 400 (in a slow or standard titration) or 600 mg/day over 6-week titration and 12-week maintenance periods. Primary efficacy criterion was intra-individual change in average daily Numeric Pain Rating Scale score from baseline to the last 4 weeks. RESULTS - For the primary end point, pain reduction was numerically but not statistically greater with lacosamide compared with placebo (400 mg/day, P = 0.12; 600 mg/day, P = 0.18). Both doses were significantly more effective compared with placebo over the titration (P = 0.03, P = 0.006), maintenance (P = 0.01, P = 0.005), and entire treatment periods (P = 0.03, P = 0.02). Safety profiles between titration schemes were similar. CONCLUSIONS - Lacosamide reduced neuropathic pain and was well tolerated in diabetic patients, but the primary efficacy criterion was not met, possibly due to an increased placebo response over the last 4 weeks. © 2010 by the American Diabetes Association.

Primary study

Unclassified

Journal The Clinical journal of pain
Year 2009
Loading references information
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial were to confirm the efficacy of lacosamide at a daily dose of 400 mg/d and to explore the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lacosamide 200 mg/d and 600 mg/d in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. METHODS: The trial consisted of a 2-week run-in period, a 6-week titration phase, and a 12-week maintenance phase, during which patients received placebo or fixed doses of lacosamide 200, 400, or 600 mg/d. No back titration was allowed during the trial. The primary efficacy criterion was the change in Likert pain score from baseline to the average over the last 4 weeks of the maintenance phase in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: The lacosamide 400 mg/d group demonstrated statistically significant improvement in Likert pain score over placebo for the primary efficacy measure. At the end of treatment, 58% of patients in the lacosamide 400 mg/d treatment group achieved at least a 2-point or 30% reduction in Likert pain score, compared with 46% of placebo-treated patients. The lacosamide 200 mg/d group separated from placebo, but failed to show statistical significance for any of the primary or secondary outcome measures. The lacosamide 600 mg/d group was significantly more efficacious than placebo in the observed cases but not in the intent-to-treat population. This was probably secondary to a relatively high-premature withdrawal rate due to adverse events that occurred during the titration phase in that group. Overall lacosamide at daily doses of 200 to 400 mg was well tolerated, with 8% of patients discontinuing due to an adverse event from the 200 mg/d group and 23% from the 400 mg/d group compared with 9% in the placebo group. Discontinuations due to adverse events were highest in the 600 mg/d group (40%). The most common adverse events consisted of dizziness, nausea, tremor, headache, and fatigue. Somnolence, cognitive and behavioral side effects, weight change, and edema were notably low. DISCUSSION: Safety and efficacy analyses indicated that lacosamide 400 mg/d provided an optimal balance between efficacy and side effects in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy.

Primary study

Unclassified

Journal The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
Year 2009
Loading references information
The efficacy and tolerability of oral lacosamide (200, 400, and 600 mg/day) was evaluated in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. The primary target dose to be confirmed was lacosamide 400 mg/day. Efficacy was assessed by changes in pain scale scores from baseline, with changes over the last 4 weeks of the 12-week maintenance period regarded as the primary endpoint. Endpoint reductions in mean pain score were higher with all doses of lacosamide, reaching the level of significance with 400 mg/day (P = .05). Over the treatment period (titration + maintenance), pain relief was significantly higher than placebo with lacosamide 400 (P = .02) and 600 mg/day (P = .03). Lacosamide had an early-onset effect with significant reductions over placebo during the titration period. Nonparametric and mixed-model analysis approaches gave similar results, supporting significant efficacy at 400 mg/day. Secondary criteria such as Patient's Global Impression of Change, responder rates, and pain-free days provided additional support. Adverse events included dizziness, nausea, and headache. Incidence of cognitive and behavioral adverse events was low. This trial suggests that lacosamide has beneficial effects and may be a suitable treatment option for patients with diabetic neuropathic pain. PERSPECTIVE: This study presents efficacy and safety results of a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the anticonvulsant drug lacosamide in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. Lacosamide treatment at a dose of 400 mg/day reduced diabetic neuropathic pain with a favorable safety and tolerability profile that may be suitable for patients with diabetes.

Primary study

Unclassified

Journal The Clinical journal of pain
Year 2007
Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Peripheral diabetic neuropathy affects between 20% and 45% of patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the effect of lacosamide on pain associated with peripheral diabetic neuropathy. METHODS: One hundred nineteen patients with a 1 to 5-year history of pain attributed to diabetic neuropathy and a score of > or =4 on the Likert pain scale entered the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lacosamide (N=60) titrated from 100 to 400 mg/d or maximum tolerated dose and placebo (N=59) were the trial interventions. Primary efficacy criterion was change in pain score on the 11-point Likert pain scale. Secondary assessments included Short-Form McGill Pain and Short-Form-36 Quality of Life Questionnaires, sleep/activity interference, pain intensity, Patient and Clinical Global Impression of Change, and Profile of Mood. Patients receiving at least 1 dose of medication underwent safety evaluation. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients (lacosamide 46; placebo 48) completed the trial. Lacosamide had significantly (P=0.039) better pain relief versus placebo (primary outcome). Improvements were also seen in secondary outcome measures. Adverse events occurred in 52 lacosamide and 44 placebo patients. Common adverse events, occurring in > or =5% of patients, were headache (lacosamide 18%, placebo 22%), dizziness (lacosamide 15%, placebo 8%), and nausea (lacosamide 12%, placebo 7%). Five lacosamide and 3 placebo patients withdrew for adverse events. DISCUSSION: Lacosamide seems to attenuate pain in diabetic neuropathy in doses up to 400 mg/d and improves quality of life issues.