Efficacy and Safety of Ralfinamide in Patients With Chronic Neuropathic Low Back Pain
NCT ID: NCT01019824
Last Updated: 2017-09-15
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
411 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2009-03-20
2011-08-09
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Phase II Dose Titration Study in Patients With Neuropathic Pain
NCT00736151
Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide in the Treatment of Painful Lumbar Radiculopathy
NCT00120120
Study to Assess the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of ADL5747 in Participants With Postherpetic Neuralgia
NCT01058642
Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of 3,4-Diaminopyridine for Demyelinating Polyneuropathy
NCT00004939
Ranolazine for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain (DPNP)
NCT02156336
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Evidence of efficacy in mixed peripheral neuropathic pain syndromes has been demonstrated in Study 001 \[Anand et al., 2008\]. In particular patients with neuropathic pain due to nerve compression (e.g., compression radiculopathy, lumbar spinal stenosis, sciatic nerve compression, spinal root compression, intercostal neuralgia) showed response to ralfinamide treatment. In this sub-population, statistically significant improvements in severity of pain, as measured on the VAS and 11-point Likert scales, as well as a greater proportion of patients meeting "responder" criteria, compared to the placebo group, were noted with ralfinamide treatment. Similarly, patients in the study classified as having neuropathic low back pain also showed significant benefit from treatment with ralfinamide; therefore, the focus of the current study is on this indication.
The current study will evaluate the safety, tolerability and analgesic efficacy of ralfinamide in patients with chronic neuropathic low back pain due to nerve compression, i.e., compression radiculopathy or post-traumatic/post-surgical lumbar radiculopathy. It should also be noted that no current drug therapy has global regulatory approval for treating this type of chronic neuropathic low back pain; therefore, should ralfinamide prove effective in this patient population, it would be satisfying an unmet medical need.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
QUADRUPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Low Dose
160 mg dose
Ralfinamide
Ralfinamide Oral Tablets, 160 or 320 mg per day
High Dose
320 mg dose
Ralfinamide
Ralfinamide Oral Tablets, 160 or 320 mg per day
Placebo
Placebo Comparator
Ralfinamide
Ralfinamide Oral Tablets, 160 or 320 mg per day
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Ralfinamide
Ralfinamide Oral Tablets, 160 or 320 mg per day
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Patient must have chronic neuropathic low back pain with a minimum intensity of "40 mm" (moderate) or greater on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 100-mm) at screening, and an average of "40 mm" or more at baseline (based on prior 7 days).
3. The onset of pain has occurred at least three months, but not longer than 3 years, prior to the screening visit, as assessed by the investigator in the patient's medical history.
4. Patient is affected by current neuropathic pain (pain provoked by a lesion of the peripheral nervous system). The diagnosis should be made by a neurologist/anaesthesiologist/pain specialist and based on history, clinical evaluation and/or laboratory findings (rule out systemic cause, e.g., hypothyroidism, rheumatoid arthritis, nephropathy, diabetes \[MNSI score \>2\]) in accordance with the taxonomy of the diagnostic criteria documented in the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) Classification of Chronic Pain. A neurological disease must be directly correlated with pain, including pain due to spinal root compression.
If radiologic data supporting the diagnosis had been obtained previously it should be documented in the patient's records. In case radiologic examinations are not available, the Investigator should consider performing these examinations, if necessary to support the diagnosis, during the screening phase.
5. Patient has one of the following causes of neuropathic low back pain: Non-cancer lumbar pain due to compression radiculopathy or post-traumatic/post-surgical lumbar radiculopathy.
6. Patient's low back pain has a clear neuropathic component, as indicated by a rating on the Pain Detect Questionnaire (PD-Q) of greater than 18.
7. Patient is 18-85 years of age, inclusive.
8. Patient is willing and able to understand and sign an approved Informed Consent Form.
Exclusion Criteria
2\. Patients with any other cause of peripheral or central neuropathic pain (including psychogenic and nociceptive pain), pain due to metabolic (including diabetes; MNSI score \> 2) infectious or proliferative diseases, or pain due to any condition that is as severe as the neuropathic pain.
3\. Patients with a history of migrating pain and former mononeuropathy or neuralgias in other anatomical territories.
4\. Patients with severe trophic changes, severe swelling, joint deformities or stiff joint with limited passive movement, or patients who may be candidates for back surgery within 52 weeks after baseline.
5\. History or current diagnosis of positive test for Hepatitis B or C (unless vaccinated).
6\. Clinically significant, uncontrolled gastrointestinal, renal, hepatic, endocrine, pulmonary or cardiovascular disease (including non well-controlled hypertension), asthma, uncompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), severe uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c \> 10.0).
7\. Second- or third-degree atrioventricular block or sick sinus syndrome, uncontrolled atrial fibrillation, severe or unstable angina, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction within 3 months of the screening visit, significant ECG abnormalities or QTc ≥ 450 msec (males) or ≥ 470 msec (females), where QTc is based on Bazett's correction method.
8\. Concomitant disease likely to interfere with the study drug (e.g. capable of altering absorption, metabolism or elimination of drugs).
18 Years
85 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Parexel
INDUSTRY
CliniRx
UNKNOWN
Newron Pharmaceuticals SPA
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Stefano Rossetti, MD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Newron Pharmaceuticals SPA
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Parexel
London, England, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
EudraCT Nr.: 2008-006176-30
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
NW-1029/01-08
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.