Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
low recruitment rate and end of study finding
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Neuropathic pain (NP) affects up to 8% of the general population and its successful management is an unmet medical need. Half of the patients report inadequate response to therapy and unwanted side effects such as sedation and cognitive impairments, limiting drug use in daily practice and significantly accounting for the high incidence of treatment failure. Dysfunction of synaptic inhibition within the spinal cord is known to be one of the main contributing factors to central sensitization that governs NP. Facilitation of GABAergic inhibition in the dorsal horn through GABAA receptors allosteric modulation would be a rational approach to NP management. New insights on the associations between GABAA receptors α subunits and function have opened new perspectives in preclinical research. Data from genetically modified mice demonstrates the possibility, through selective allosteric modulation of the GABAA receptor, to induce its beneficial antihyperalgesic effects without inducing its cognitive and sedative effects. N-Desmethylclobazam (NDMC), clobazam's main active metabolite, demonstrated in vitro and in vivo a high selectivity profile with a clear preference for GABAA α2-subtypes receptors (antihyperalgesia) over α1 receptors responsible for sedative effects across a wide concentration range. Taking into consideration the high prevalence and burden of neuropathic and chronic pain worldwide and the fact that these patients are nowadays left with sedative and only partially effective drugs, NDMC qualifies as a good molecule to seek confirmation of the clinical utility of selective GABAA allosteric modulators in NP patients.The main objective is to assess the efficacy of repeated doses of NDMC on neuropathic pain compared to placebo.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| NDMC 40 mg/day | Experimental | Oral administration of two NDMC 20mg capsules per day over 6 weeks |
|
| NDMC 60 mg/day | Experimental | Oral administration of three NDMC 20mg capsules per day over 6 weeks |
|
| NDMC 120 mg/day | Experimental | Oral administration of six NDMC 20mg capsules per day over 6 weeks |
|
| Placebo | Placebo Comparator | Oral administration respectively, according to the experimental arm considered, of two, three or six placebo capsules per day over 6 weeks |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDMC | Drug | Repeated oral administration of ascending daily doses of NDMC (40mg, 60mg,120mg/day) vs placebo in 3 sequential cohorts |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Weekly Average of daily Pain intensity score (WAP) | Participant will self-rate once every day his average daily pain. The weekly average of daily pain intensity score will be derived from the 7 (at least 5) recordings preceding Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). Numerical Rating Scale = 0 "no pain" to 10 = "worst possible pain". The primary outcome will be the change from Baseline to Final evaluation. | Week 0, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Evolution of Weekly Average of daily Pain intensity score (EWAP) | Assessment of the evolution overtime of the weekly average of daily pain intensity score between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | Week 0, Week 1, Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Weekly Average of daily subjective feeling of Sedation (WAS) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Steady state NDMC Cmin concentration | Determination of mean NDMC Cmin concentrations at steady state following daily administration (40mg, 60mg, 120mg) in 3 sequential cohorts of patients. | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Marie Besson, MD | University Hospital, Geneva | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geneva University Hospitals | Geneva | Canton of Geneva | 1205 | Switzerland |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009437 | Neuralgia |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010523 | Peripheral Nervous System Diseases |
| D009468 | Neuromuscular Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D010146 | Pain |
Not provided
Not provided
3 Sequences separated by 2 interim analyses evaluating safety and PK linearity. Sequence 1: 8 Patients randomized to placebo or NDMC 40mg/day (ratio 1:3) qd for 6 weeks. Sequence 2 will be initiated following the first interim analysis.
Sequence 2: 8 Patients randomized to placebo or NDMC 60mg/day (ratio 1:3) qd for 6 weeks. Sequence 3 will be initiated following the second interim analysis. Otherwise Sequence 2 will be extended to a total of 30 placebo and 32 patients.
Sequence 3: 60 Patients randomized to placebo or NDMC 60mg/day (ratio 28:32) bid for 6 weeks. Patients who do not tolerate 120mg/day will be authorized to step down to 60mg/day during the up titration period.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
Participant will self-rate once every day his daily subjective feeling of sedation. The weekly average of daily subjective feeling of sedation score will be derived from the 7 (at least 5) recordings preceding Baseline (Week 0) and Final Evaluation (Week 6). Numerical Rating Scale = 0 "not sleepy" to 10 = "extremely sleepy". |
| Week 0, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Evolution of Weekly Average of daily subjective feeling of Sedation (EWAS) | Assessments of the evolution overtime of the weekly average of daily subjective feeling of sedation score, each week between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | Week 0, Week 1, Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Composite 2-Dimension Score (C2-D) | The Composite 2-Dimension score will assess the benefit/tolerance balance of NDMC for each dose. The score is defined as the aggregated value of the changes between baseline and final evaluation on the weekly average of daily pain intensity score and the weekly average of daily subjective sedation score. Score ranges from -10 to + 16. Score ≤ -2 indicates a favorable balance and score ≥ 2 an unfavorable balance. | Week 0, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Evolution of Composite 2-Dimension Score (EC2-D) | Assessments of the evolution overtime of the Composite 2-Dimension score, each week between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | Week 0, Week 1, Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Douleur neuropathique 4 questionnaire (DN4) | Participant will complete the DN4 questionnaire which is a screening tool for neuropathic pain consisting of interview questions. This questionnaire gives a score ranging from 0 (better) to 10 (worse); a score ≥4 is an indicator of plausible neuropathic pain. | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) | Participant will complete the NPSI questionnaire which is an inventory tool for neuropathic pain consisting of interview questions.This questionnaire has 12 scaled scores and gives a score ranging from 0 (better) to 100 (worse) | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Short Form Questionnaire (SF-36) | Participant will complete the health status questionnaire consisting of 36 interview questions. The SF-36 has eight scaled scores; the scores are weighted sums of the questions in each section. Scores range from 0 - 100. Lower scores = more disability, higher scores = less disability. | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) | Participant will complete the anxiety and depression questionnaire consisting in two sets of 7 questions on anxiety or depression. HADS gives anxiety and depression scores both ranging from 0 (better) to 21 (worse) | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) | Participant will complete the PGIC questionnaire, which is a 7-point scale ranging from -3 (very much worse), 0 (no change), to +3 (very much improved) answering the question: "Please, indicate how you feel now, compared to how you felt before receiving treatment in this study" | Visit 1 to Visit 7 |
| Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) | Investigator will complete CGI questionnaire which is a 7-point CGI scale: from 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse) to 7 (very much worse) answering the question: "Please, indicate how much the patient's condition has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention" | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Medical Outcome Study Sleep Score (MOS-Sleep) | Participant will complete the MOS-sleep questionnaire, which is composed of 12 items. Higher scores reflect more of the attribute implied by the scale names | Week 0, Week 2, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Responder Rates (30% / 50%) | Participants will be dichotomized into "responders" and "non-responders" categories. These transformations will be based on the reduction of at least 30%, respectively 50%, of the weekly average daily pain intensity score between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | Week 0, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Rescue Medication Rate | Participants will be dichotomized into "rescue med" and "no rescue med" categories. This transformation will be based on the use of rescue medications between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | Week 0, Week 6 following first drug administration |
| Withdrawal Rate | Participants will be dichotomized into "early withdrawal" and "completion" categories. This transformation will be based on the occurrence of premature withdrawal related to lack of efficacy or due treatment emergent adverse effect between Baseline (Week 0) and Final evaluation (Week 6). | throughout the study (up to 6 weeks) |
| D009461 |
| Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |