Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Controlled-Release Pregabalin for the Treatment of Patients With Postherpetic Neuralgia: A Double-Blind, Enriched Enrollment Randomized Withdrawal, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess efficacy and safety of once-daily controlled-release (CR) formulation of pregabalin in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. METHODS: An enriched enrollment, randomized withdrawal trial, with 6-week single-blind pregabalin treatment phase and 13-week double-blind phase, where patients with ≥50% decrease in mean pain score at single-blind end point from baseline were randomized (1:1) to pregabalin CR (82.5 to 660 mg/d) or placebo. Primary efficacy outcome was time to loss of therapeutic response (LTR) (<30% decrease in weekly mean pain score from single-blind baseline or discontinuation due to adverse event or lack of efficacy). Secondary efficacy outcomes included change in weekly mean pain score (1-wk recall period) at double-blind end point. RESULTS: In total, 801 patients were randomized and treated in the single-blind phase, and 413 in the double-blind phase (208, pregabalin CR; 205, placebo). Pregabalin CR significantly increased time to LTR versus placebo (Kaplan-Meier analysis) with significantly fewer LTR events with pregabalin CR than with placebo (29 [13.9%] vs. 63 [30.7%]; P<0.0001). Median time to LTR was not estimable. Pregabalin CR significantly improved weekly mean pain score versus placebo: LS mean difference (95% CI) of -1.11 (-1.47, -0.75) and -1.00 (-1.34, -0.65) (P<0.0001) from single-blind baseline and double-blind baseline, respectively. Most commonly reported adverse events in the single-blind phase were dizziness, somnolence, and peripheral edema. Pregabalin CR was well tolerated. DISCUSSION: Time to LTR was significantly longer with pregabalin CR than with placebo. Safety profile of pregabalin CR was comparable to that reported for the immediate-release formulation in patients with postherpetic neuralgia.

Pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain: results from three controlled trials using different surgical models.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin (150 or 300 mg/d) as an adjunctive therapy for the treatment of postoperative pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study reports findings from three separate, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain. Patients underwent one of three categories of surgical procedures (one procedure per study): elective inguinal hernia repair (post-IHR); elective total knee arthroplasty (post-TKA); or total abdominal hysterectomy (posthysterectomy). The primary endpoint in each trial, mean worst pain over the past 24 hours, was assessed 24 hours post-IHR and posthysterectomy, and 48 hours post-TKA. Patients rated their pain on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater pain severity. RESULTS: In total, 425 (post-IHR), 307 (post-TKA), and 501 (posthysterectomy) patients were randomized to treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between the pregabalin and placebo groups with respect to the primary endpoint in any of the three trials. The least squares mean difference in worst pain, between 300 mg/d pregabalin and placebo, was -0.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] =-1.4, -0.1; Hochberg adjusted P=0.067) post-IHR; -0.34 (95% CI =-1.07, 0.39; P=0.362) post-TKA; and -0.2 (95% CI =-0.66, 0.31; P=0.471) posthysterectomy. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences between pregabalin and placebo with respect to the primary pain intensity measure in each of the three clinical trials. These studies encompass a large dataset (1,233 patients in total), and their results should be considered when assessing pregabalin's effectiveness in postoperative pain. Further studies are required to determine the potential pain-reducing benefit of pregabalin in the postoperative setting.

Once daily controlled-release pregabalin in the treatment of patients with fibromyalgia: a phase III, double-blind, randomized withdrawal, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Safety and efficacy of a once daily controlled-released (CR) formulation of pregabalin was evaluated in patients with fibromyalgia using a placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal design. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicenter study included 6 week single-blind pregabalin CR treatment followed by 13 week double-blind treatment with placebo or pregabalin CR. The starting dose of 165 mg/day was escalated during the first 3 weeks, up to 495 mg/day based on efficacy and tolerability. Patients with ≥50% reduction in average daily pain score at the end of the single-blind phase were randomized to continue pregabalin CR at the optimized dose (330-495 mg/day) or to placebo. The primary endpoint was time to loss of therapeutic response (LTR), defined as <30% pain reduction relative to single-blind baseline or discontinuation owing to lack of efficacy or adverse event (AE). Secondary endpoints included measures of pain severity, global assessment, functional status, tiredness/fatigue, and sleep. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01271933. RESULTS: A total of 441 patients entered the single-blind phase, and 63 were randomized to pregabalin CR and 58 to placebo. The median time to LTR (Kaplan-Meier analysis) was significantly longer in the pregabalin CR group than placebo (58 vs. 22 days, p = 0.02). By trial end, 34/63 (54.0%) pregabalin CR and 41/58 (70.7%) placebo patients experienced LTR. Significantly more patients reported 'benefit from treatment' (Benefit, Satisfaction, and Willingness to Continue Scale) in the pregabalin CR group; no other secondary endpoints were statistically significant. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity (most frequent: dizziness, somnolence). The percentage of pregabalin CR patients discontinuing because of AEs was 12.2% and 4.8% in the single-blind and double-blind phases, respectively (placebo, 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Time to LTR was significantly longer with pregabalin CR versus placebo in fibromyalgia patients who initially showed improvement with pregabalin CR, indicating maintenance of response. Pregabalin CR was well tolerated in most patients. Generalizability may be limited by study duration and selective population.

Efficacy and safety of pregabalin in patients with spinal cord injury: a pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the efficacy and examine the safety and tolerability of pregabalin in patients with central neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury (SCI). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were pooled from two 12 to 16 week, placebo-controlled trials of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain due to SCI. Pain diaries were used to rate pain from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain. Efficacy measures included: mean change in pain from baseline to endpoint; duration adjusted average change (DAAC) in pain; the percentage of patients with ≥30% or ≥50% reductions in pain score from baseline to endpoint; and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) score at endpoint. Adverse events (AEs) were also compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: In total 174 patients received placebo and 182 received pregabalin. Mean change in pain from baseline to endpoint was improved in the pregabalin group compared with placebo (placebo-adjusted difference = -0.79; 95% CI = -1.15, -0.43; p < 0.001; baseline-observation-carried-forward). DAAC in pain was improved in patients receiving pregabalin compared with placebo (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients achieving ≥30% and ≥50% reductions in pain from baseline to endpoint was greater in the pregabalin arm compared with placebo (placebo: 30% = 22.5%, 50% = 11.6: pregabalin 30% = 35.6%, 50% = 22.4%) (all p < 0.01). PGIC scores at endpoint were significantly better in the pregabalin arm compared with placebo (p < 0.05). Treatment-related AEs, most commonly somnolence, dizziness, dry mouth, fatigue, edema, blurred vision, and constipation occurred more frequently in patients treated with pregabalin than placebo. The majority of AEs were mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Pregabalin reduced neuropathic pain due to SCI over a 12 to 16 week treatment period. Treatment-related AEs were mostly mild to moderate in severity and are consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin. These findings should not be extrapolated to longer durations of treatment or other patient populations.

A randomized trial of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin for the treatment of central neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: Patients with chronic, below-level, neuropathic pain due to SCI were randomized to receive 150 to 600 mg/d pregabalin (n = 108) or matching placebo (n = 112) for 17 weeks. Pain was classified in relation to the neurologic level of injury, defined as the most caudal spinal cord segment with normal sensory and motor function, as above, at, or below level. The primary outcome measure was duration-adjusted average change in pain. Key secondary outcome measures included the change in mean pain score from baseline to end point, the percentage of patients with ≥30% reduction in mean pain score at end point, patient global impression of change scores at end point, and the change in mean pain-related sleep interference score from baseline to end point. Additional outcome measures included the medical outcomes study-sleep scale and the Hospital anxiety and depression scale. RESULTS: Pregabalin treatment resulted in statistically significant improvements over placebo for all primary and key secondary outcome measures. Significant pain improvement was evident as early as week 1 and was sustained throughout the treatment period. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin and were mostly mild to moderate in severity. Somnolence and dizziness were most frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that pregabalin is effective and well tolerated in patients with neuropathic pain due to SCI. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides class I evidence that pregabalin, 150 to 600 mg/d, is effective in reducing duration-adjusted average change in pain compared with baseline in patients with SCI over a 16-week period (p = 0.003, 95% confidence interval = -0.98, -0.20).

Histone deacetylase 3 represses HTLV-1 tax transcription.

We examined the epigenetic mechanisms involved in human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) Tax expression. Blockade of histone deacetylation with trichostatin A (TSA) resulted in Tax upregulation. Using a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay, we verified local histone hyperacetylation at the HTLV-1 LTR in response to TSA. In agreement, HDAC3 transfection led to reductions in both Tax expression and histone acetylation. HDAC3 mutations and deletions spanning the catalytic site had variable ability to repress Tax, but HDAC activity was not essential for repression. Immunoprecipitation studies revealed that Tax co-exists in a complex containing both histone deacetylase 1 (HDAC1) and 3 (HDAC3). Our results suggest that HDACs may actively participate in the repression of HTLV-1 Tax transcription.

Clasificación del TOAST en la práctica clínica de un hospital universitario / TOAST classification in the clinical practice in a universitary hospital

La clasificación de la enfermedad cerebrovascular inquémica por subtipos conlleva el doble interés de permitir un mejor y más rápido tratamiento para el paciente y una más fácil y adecuada caracterización de los factores de riesgo, lo que facilita la prevención secundaria. El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar la factibilidad de clasificar la enfermedad cerebrovascular isquémica según los parámetros utilizados por el TOAST, en los pacientes atendidos en un hospital universitario de la ciudad de Bogotá. La aplicación de los criterios dwe TOAST generó una alta proporción de ECV de etiología no determinada. La falta de estudios de los vasos intracerebrales ocasiona una sobreestimación de este grupo y una subestimación de pacientes con múltiples factores de riesgo y de gran vaso. Esta limitación obliga a replantear su uso en nuestro medio

Calidad de sueño: ¿un constructo suceptible de ser medido? Desarrollo de un cuestionario de autoevaluación

Objetivo: Desarrollar un cuestionario de autoevaluación de la calidad de sueño considerando: Continuidad, higiene del sueño y los efectos de un "mal" dormir. Métodos: Revisión de cuestionarios. Entrevista estructurada en 50 sujetos sanos explorando percepciones sobre calidad de sueño. Selección aleatoria multietápica de empleados de empresas ubicadas en Santafé de Bogotá. Análisis factorial apra determinar estructura subyacente e ítems relacionados. Resultados: Se aplicó en 415 sujetos el cuestionario original de 42 ítems. El 64 por ciento corresponde a mujeres. La mediana de la edad fue de 29 años para mabos sexos. El 17 por ciento consideró tener un "mal" dormir tres o más días a la semana y 18 por ciento refirió parsar la noche volteanado de un lado para el otro. Por otra parte, el 19 por ciento indicó tardadr más de 30 minutos en conciliar el sueño o despertarse más de tres veces en la noche. De manera similar 17 por ciento admitió no poder reconciliar el sueño de despertar en la madrugada. La solución factorial determinó cuatro factores. Se retuvieron 19 ítems con carga factorial significativa. El primer factor con 11 ítems, describe el inicio y el mantenimiento del sueño y el segundo y el tercer factores con cuatro ítems cada uno describen los efectos de un "mal" dormir. Conclusiones: Calidad de sueño es un constructo suceptible de ser medido. Su valiadez está respaldada por el análisis factorial. El presente estudio sugiere por lo tanto que puede considerarse como un constructo per se en el cual se identifica una estructura subyacente con por lo menos dos dimenciones: continuidad y los efectos de un "mal" dormir.