AzTrials
AzTrials

Postherpetic NeuralgiaPhase 2NCT00612105

Safety/Efficacy Study of Retigabine vs. Placebo in Post-Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN)

A Phase 2 study testing Retigabine in people with Postherpetic Neuralgia, run by Bausch Health Americas, Inc. at 45 sites in 2 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of retigabine vs. placebo in reducing pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 85 years
Conditions the study is for
Postherpetic Neuralgia
What is being tested?
Retigabine
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
187 participants
Where
45 sitesin 2 countries
Study dates
Oct 2007to Dec 2009
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 85 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Ability to provide informed consent
  • Male or female subjects
  • 18-85 years of age
  • PHN for more than 6 months after the healing of herpes zoster skin rash
  • Has a pain score at screening and randomization that qualifies

Who cannot join

  • Other significant pain that may potentially confound PHN pain assessment
  • Previous neurolytic or neurosurgical therapy for PHN
  • Subject has evidence of a progressive central nervous system (CNS) disease (e.g. CNS lupus, tumors, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's), lesion, or encephalopathy
  • Significant psychiatric or neuropsychiatric disorders including but not limited to severe depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia spectrum disorder, history of suicide attempt, or recent history of suicidal ideation
  • Has clinically significant abnormalities on physical examination, vital signs, ECG, or laboratory tests at the screening visit

Trial locations and contacts

45 sites in 2 countries.

45 sites in 2 countries

United States41 sites
  • Study site

    Allentown, Pennsylvania, 18103

  • Study site

    Atlanta, Georgia, 30308

  • Study site

    Atlanta, Georgia, 30309

  • Study site

    Austin, Texas, 78756

  • Study site

    Bay City, Michigan, 48706

  • Study site

    Birmingham, Alabama, 35215

  • Study site

    Bridgeville, Pennsylvania, 15017

  • Study site

    Charleston, South Carolina, 29412

  • Study site

    Cleveland, Ohio, 44195

  • Study site

    Detroit, Michigan, 48201

  • Study site

    Evansville, Indiana, 47714

  • Study site

    Fargo, North Dakota, 58104

  • Study site

    Garden Grove, California, 92845

  • Study site

    Hattiesburg, Mississippi, 39401

  • Study site

    La Jolla, California, 92037

  • Study site

    Lexington, Kentucky, 40503

  • Study site

    Little River, South Carolina, 29566

  • Study site

    Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205

  • Study site

    Mesa, Arizona, 85210

  • Study site

    Midvale, Utah, 84047-1761

  • Study site

    Mogadore, Ohio, 44260

  • Study site

    Nashville, Tennessee, 37215

  • Study site

    New York, New York, 10004

  • Study site

    North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, 29582

  • Study site

    Orlando, Florida, 32806

  • Study site

    Overland Park, Kansas, 66211

  • Study site

    Raleigh, North Carolina, 27607

  • Study site

    San Antonio, Texas, 78229

  • Study site

    San Diego, California, 92128

  • Study site

    Sarasota, Florida, 34243

  • Study site

    Shreveport, Louisiana, 71103

  • Study site

    St Louis, Missouri, 63117

  • Study site

    St Louis, Missouri, 63141

  • Study site

    Sugar Land, Texas, 77479

  • Study site

    Tabor City, North Carolina, 28463

  • Study site

    Tampa, Florida, 33613

  • Study site

    Toms River, New Jersey, 8755

  • Study site

    Tucson, Arizona, 85741

  • Study site

    West Palm Beach, Florida, 33407

  • Study site

    Westlake Village, California, 91361

  • Study site

    Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27103

Other trials in United States

South Africa4 sites
  • Study site

    Belville, Western Cape, 7530

  • Study site

    Bloemfontein, Free State, 9300

  • Study site

    George, Western Cape, 6529

  • Study site

    Port Elizabeth, Eastern Cape, 6001

Other trials in South Africa

About this study

Official title: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2a Proof-of-Concept Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Maximally Tolerated Doses of Retigabine vs. Placebo in Reducing the Pain Associated With Post-Herpetic Neuralgia

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of retigabine vs. placebo in reducing pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia.

Read the detailed description

This is a Phase 2a proof of concept study evaluating the safety/efficacy of retigabine vs. placebo in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia. After screening, patients will enter a maximum 6 week titration period followed by a 4 week maintenance period and a 3 week taper phase.

Being tested
Retigabine, Placebo
Keywords
Postherpetic Neuralgia, PHN, Shingles,
Medical subject headings
Neuralgia, Postherpetic, Herpes Zoster

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • RetigabineDrug

    150mg/day up to 900mg/day

  • PlaceboDrug

    daily

Study groups in NCT00612105
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
1ExperimentalRetigabine
Receives: Drug: Retigabine
2Placebo comparatorPlacebo
Receives: Drug: Placebo

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Primary Endpoint Will be the Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score Over the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase.

    Change from Baseline (BL) was calculated as the value of the average diary pain score for the last 7 days of the MP minus the value of the average pain score at BL (post wash-out period, including the average of the last 7 available entries prior to/including the diary pain measurement on Titration Day 0). Based on their pain experienced during the previous 24 hours, participants assessed their pain every evening at bedtime in an electronic diary by choosing the appropriate number on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS): 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 (Maintenance Phase-MP)

Secondary outcomes (22)
  1. Change From Baseline to Weeks 2 and 4 of the Maintenance Phase in Mean In-clinic Pain Assessment

    Participants rated their pain during the previous 24 hours at all clinic visits using an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS): 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain (10=worst possible pain). Change in In-clinic Pain Assessment was calculated by subtracting the average score on the NRS at Week 2 and Week 4 (values for each week were observed cases) of the MP from the average score on the NRS at Baseline (the last non-missing measurement prior to taking study drug).

    Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2 and 4 (Maintenance Phase - MP)

  2. Number of Rescue Medication Tablets Taken Per Day During the Maintenance Phase (MP)

    Participants recorded the number of acetaminophen tablets taken during the previous 24 hours in a participant diary. Rescue medication was summarized as the mean number of doses taken per day during each week of the Maintenance Phase (MP) and the mean number of doses taken during all MP weeks.

    Measured: Weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4 Maintenance Phase

  3. Change From Baseline in Pain Intensity Score at Each Week During the Maintenance Phase (MP)

    Least square mean (LSM) of pain intensity was calculated from the NRS score entered by the participants in their diaries at each week during the MP. Participants rated their pain during the previous 24 hours at all clinic visits using an NRS: 0, no pain; 1-3, mild; 4-6, moderate; 7-10 (worst possible pain), severe pain. Change from Baseline was calculated by subtracting the value of the average of the LSM of the NRS score at each week during the MP (the last 7 available diary entries in the MP were used, provided at least 3 existed) from the average Baseline value of the LSM of the NRS score.

    Measured: Baseline and Weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4 (MP)

  4. Number of Participants Classified as Responders, With a 50% and 30% Pain Reduction From Baseline to the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase

    Responders were defined as participants achieving a mean >=50% or >=30% pain reduction based on the NRS score from Baseline to the last 7 days of the MP. Those participants who did not have at least 3 diary entries in the MP, those who withdrew during the Titration Phase (TP), and non-completers (NC: who did not complete the study) were classified as non-responders. The number of responders and responders including non-completers from Baseline to the last 7 days of the MP were reported.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 Maintenance Phase (MP)

  5. Change From Baseline to the End of the MP (Included All Participants Who Completed Week 4 of the MP and Who Terminated Early During the MP) in Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale Scores

    Change from BL (average value of MOS Sleep Scale score including Overall Sleep Problem [OSP] Index at end of MP minus average BL value) to the end of the MP was summarized for the OSP Index, in addition to the following subscales of the MOS Sleep Scale: Sleep Disturbance; Sleep Adequacy; Snoring; Awakening with Shortness of Breath or with a Headache; Somnolence; and Optimal Sleep. Each item was transformed to a scale with a range of 0-100. For each subscale, except Optimal Sleep, higher scores indicate a greater level of what was being measured (i.e., more snoring, more sleep adequacy, etc.).

    Measured: Baseline and End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4).

  6. Change From Baseline to the End of the MP (Included All Participants Who Completed Week 4 of the MP and Who Terminated Early During the MP) in Sleep Quantity

    Change from Baseline in sleep quantity was calculated by subtracting the average value of sleep quantity, calculated in hours, at the end of the MP from the average Baseline value.

    Measured: Baseline and End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4).

  7. Number of Participants With the Indicated Change From Baseline to the End of the Maintenance Phase in Optimal Sleep Based on the Sleep Quantity Domain of the MOS Sleep Scale

    Optimal Sleep was based on the Sleep Quantity domain of the MOS Sleep Scale and included the options of "Yes" if sleep quantity was 7-8 hours, and "No" otherwise. "Improved" indicated a change in response of no at baseline to yes at the end of the MP, "Same" indicated no change in response, and "Worse" indicated a change in response from yes at baseline to no at the end of the MP.

    Measured: Baseline and End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4).

  8. Number of Participants With the Indicated Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)

    For the PGIC assessment, participants were asked to assess their overall status since they initiated the study drug to the end of the Maintenance Phase using a 7-point categorical scale: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, and 7=very much worse. All participants who completed Week 4 of the Maintenance Phase and participants who terminated early during the Maintenance Phase were assessed.

    Measured: Baseline to the end of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  9. Mean Score on the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) at the End of the Maintenance Phase

    The TSQM assessed the participant's overall satisfaction with treatment, including subscales to assess effectiveness, side effects, convenience, and global satisfaction. Raw scores from the scale were transformed into a numeric scale ranging from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicated greater satisfaction with treatment. TSQM was reported at the end of the MP. Participants who completed Week 4 of the MP and who terminated early during the MP were assessed.

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  10. Scores on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) at the End of the MP for All Participants Who Completed Week-4 of the MP and Who Terminated Early During the MP

    The BPI-SF assessed pain intensity, pain relief from medication, and pain interference with function over the previous 24 hours. Pain intensity was assessed by the mean of 4 intensity items rated on a 0-10 categorical scale: 0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Pain interference was assessed by determining the mean of the 7 interference items on a 0-10 categorical scale ranging from 0=does not interfere to 10=completely interferes. The level of pain relief provided by treatment was assessed on an 11-point categorical scale ranging from 0% to 100%

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  11. Scores on the Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 (SF-36) at the End of the MP for All Participants Who Completed Week 4 of the MP and Who Terminated Early During the MP

    Least square (LS) mean calculated based on participant's assessment of SF-36,a quality of life questionnaire consisting of 36 items grouped into 8 domains. These 8 domains further grouped into 2 overall summary measures,physical health and mental health. Higher scores on SF-36 represented better state of health. Physical/mental components summarized the data of all the physical/mental domains of SF-36 and higher scores represented better state of health.

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  12. Scores for Reported Health Transition at the End of the MP for All Participants Who Completed Week 4 of the MP and Who Terminated Early During the MP

    The least square (LS) mean score for reported health transition was calculated based on the scores (ranging from 1 to 5) given by the participant in answer to the following question: "Compared to 1 year ago, how would you rate your health in general now?". Lower numbers represent a better state of health.

    Measured: End of maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  13. Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses at Baseline to the Question: "How Painful Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" in an Assessment of Tactile Allodynia

    At Baseline, the investigator conducted the Neuropathic Pain Physical Examination (NPPE) to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Tactile allodynia was assessed with a foam brush, based on the question:"How painful was the affected side compared to the opposite side?".

    Measured: Baseline Phase (Day -7 to Randomization Day 0)

  14. Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses at Baseline to the Questions of "Is it Cool?" and "Is it Painful?" in an Assessment of Cold Threshold and Allodynia

    At Baseline the investigator conducted the NPPE to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Cold threshold and allodynia was assessed to determine if a metal bar felt cool and if it felt painful, based on the questions:"Is it cool?" and "Is it painful?"

    Measured: Timeframe: Baseline Phase (Day -7 to Randomization Day 0)

  15. Number of Subjects With the Indicated Responses at Baseline to the Questions: "How Sharp Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" and "How Painfule Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" in an Assessment of Hyperalgesia

    At Baseline the investigator conducted the NPPE to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Hyperalgesia is defined as increased sensitivity to pain, which may be caused by damage to peripheral nerves. It was assessed with a pinprick brush, based on the questions: "How sharp was the affected side compared to the opposite side?" and "How painfule was the affected side compared to the opposite side?"

    Measured: Baseline Phase (Day -7 to Randomization Day 0)

  16. Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses at the End of the MP to the Question: "How Painful Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" in an Assessment of Tactile Allodynia

    At the end of the MP, the investigator conducted the NPPE (an examination of the effect of retigabine on sensory abnormalities) to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Tactile allodynia was assessed with a foam brush, based on the question:"How painful was the affected side compared to the opposite side?" End of Maintenance Phase includes participants who completed Week 4 of the MP and who terminated early during the MP.

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  17. Number of Participants With the Indicated Responses at the End of the MP to the Questions of "Is it Cool?" and "Is it Painful?" in an Assessment of Cold Threshold and Allodynia

    At the end of the MP, the investigator conducted the NPPE (an examination of the effect of retigabine on sensory abnormalities) to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Cold threshold and allodynia was assessed to determine if a metal bar felt cool and if it felt painful, based on the questions:"Is it cool?" and "Is it painful?"

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  18. Number of Participants With Indicated Responses at the End of the MP to the Questions: "How Sharp Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" and "How Painful Was the Affected Side Compared to the Opposite Side?" in an Assessment of Hyperalgesia

    At the end of the MP, the investigator conducted the NPPE (an examination of the effect of retigabine on sensory abnormalities) to examine hyperalgesia and allodynia (tactile and cold). Hyperalgesia is defined as increased sensitivity to pain, which may be caused by damage to peripheral nerves. It was assessed with a pinprick brush, based on the questions:"How sharp was the affected side compared to the opposite side?" and How painful was the affected side compared to the opposite side?"

    Measured: End of Maintenance Phase (MP) (Week 4)

  19. Change From Baseline in the Average Diary Pain Score to the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase by Post Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN) Subtype "Irritable Nociceptors"

    Participants were stratified into four different PHN subtypes based on the NPPE. Participants with pain, abnormal sensitization of the specific receptor (irritable nociceptors), and with minimal sensory loss were stratified in the"irritable nociceptors" subtype. Based on their pain experienced during the previous 24 hours, participants assessed their pain every evening at bedtime in an electronic diary by choosing the appropriate number on an 11-point NRS: 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 Maintenance Phase (MP)

  20. Change From Baseline in the Average Diary Pain Score to the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase by Post Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN) Subtype"Deafferentation Type 1 (D Type 1)"

    Participants stratified into 4 different PHN subtypes based on NPPE. Participants with marked sensory loss associated with severe burning pain upon slight mechanical stimuli (allodynia) were stratified in the "deafferentation type 1" subtype. Based on their pain experienced during the previous 24 hours, participants assessed their pain every evening at bedtime in an electronic diary by choosing the appropriate number on an 11-point NRS: 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 Maintenance Phase (MP)

  21. Change From Baseline in the Average Diary Pain Score to the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase by Post Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN) Subtype "Deafferentation Type 2 (D Type 2)"

    Participants stratified into 4 different PHN subtypes based on NPPE. Participants with marked sensory loss and severe spontaneous burning pain without allodynia associated with reorganization of central nerve fibers were stratified in the "deafferentation type 2" subtype. Based on their pain experienced during the previous 24 hours, participants assessed their pain every evening at bedtime in an electronic diary by choosing the appropriate number on an 11-point NRS: 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 Maintenance phase (MP)

  22. Change From Baseline in the Average Diary Pain Score to the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase by Post Herpetic Neuralgia (PHN) Subtype "Unclassifiable"

    Participants stratified into 4 different PHN subtypes based on NPPE. Participants who could not be specifically differentiated in any of the other three subtypes were stratified as "unclassifiable" meaning that the participants could not be classified into any of the predefined PHN subtypes. Based on their pain experienced during the previous 24 hours, participants assessed their pain every evening at bedtime in an electronic diary by choosing the appropriate number on an 11-point NRS: 0, no pain; 1 to 3, mild; 4 to 6, moderate; 7 to 10, severe pain.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 4 Maintenance Phase (MP)

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted11 Feb 2008 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2007
  3. Primary completionMay 2009
  4. Study completionDec 2009

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
187 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00612105
Sponsor's protocol ID
VRX-RET-E22-NP201
Status last verified
Apr 2018
First submitted
25 Jan 2008
Last updated
8 May 2018
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing Retigabine in people with Postherpetic Neuralgia, run by Bausch Health Americas, Inc. at 45 sites in 2 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 May 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 45 sites in United States, South Africa. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 11 Jan 2012). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Primary Endpoint Will be the Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score Over the Last 7 Days of the Maintenance Phase. (time frame: Baseline and Week 4 (Maintenance Phase-MP)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 May 2018.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in