Impact of responder definition on the enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal trial design for establishing proof of concept in neuropathic pain
- PMID: 21185118
- DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.050
Impact of responder definition on the enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal trial design for establishing proof of concept in neuropathic pain
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate how enrichment for responders increases assay sensitivity in an enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal (EERW) proof-of-concept (POC) study in neuropathic pain. Adults with moderate to severe peripheral neuropathic pain entered a 3- to 4-day screening period, followed by a 12-day titration to the highest tolerated dose that provided pain control (pregabalin 50-200mg t.i.d.), and then a 9-day maintenance period. Subjects were stratified as primary responders (⩾30%), secondary responders (⩾10% to <30%), or nonresponders (<10%) based on decrease in pain intensity and were randomized to placebo or pregabalin during the randomized withdrawal period. The primary endpoint was mean of average 24-h pain intensity during the last 3days of treatment period relative to the 3days before randomization. Time-to-efficacy-failure was the key secondary endpoint. Other features included not requiring discontinuation of current analgesic therapies and blinding investigators to study design elements that could contribute to non-treatment-related responses. Effect size (ES) (mean treatment difference/SD) was used to measure assay sensitivity. Pregabalin-treated subjects (n=52) had significantly less pain than those receiving placebo (n=51) (P⩽.003). Effect size of the primary endpoint was 0.72 for primary responders and decreased if secondary and nonresponders were included in the analysis. The highest ES (1.68) was demonstrated for the endpoint time-to-efficacy-failure seen in primary responders with painful diabetic neuropathy. The EERW trial design using time-to-efficacy-failure may provide a sensitive and efficient method to conduct POC studies of novel therapies in patients with neuropathic pain. Enriching a study population with patients who have achieved a 30% decrease in pain with an investigational therapy, and using time-to-efficacy-failure during the randomized withdrawal phase as the primary endpoint, can be used for a proof-of-concept study to optimize assay sensitivity and efficiently determine the analgesic potential of a new treatment for neuropathic pain.
Copyright © 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Study selection criteria and the choices we make.Pain. 2011 Mar;152(3):471-472. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.028. Epub 2010 Dec 9. Pain. 2011. PMID: 21145655 No abstract available.
References
-
- Costigan M, Scholz J, Woolf CJ. Neuropathic pain: a maladaptive response of the nervous system to damage. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2009;32:1-32.
-
- Crofford LJ, Mease PJ, Simpson SL, Young JP Jr, Martin SA, Haig GM, Sharma U. Fibromyalgia relapse evaluation and efficacy for durability of meaningful relief (FREEDOM): a 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with pregabalin. Pain. 2008;136:419-431.
-
- Dworkin RH, O’Connor AB, Backonja M, Farrar JT, Finnerup NB, Jensen TS, Kalso EA, Loeser JD, Miaskowski C, Nurmikko TJ, Portenoy RK, Rice AS, Stacey BR, Treede RD, Turk DC, Wallace MS. Pharmacologic management of neuropathic pain: evidence-based recommendations. Pain. 2007;132:237-251.
-
- Finnerup NB, Otto M, McQuay HJ, Jensen TS, Sindrup SH. Algorithm for neuropathic pain treatment: an evidence based proposal. Pain. 2005;118:289-305.
-
- Finnerup NB, Sindrup SH, Jensen TS. Chronic neuropathic pain: mechanisms, drug targets and measurement. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2007;21:129-136.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
