Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of the study is to further understand the closed-loop feature in chronically implanted patients by characterizing the efficacy of the next generation, spinal cord stimulator.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inceptiv | Device | Implantable Neurostimulator with Neuro Sense |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Reduction in Overstimulation Sensation | The primary outcome is the proportion of low-back and/or leg pain subjects whose average overstimulation intensity score with Closed Loop On is less than their average overstimulation intensity score with Closed Loop Off. During in-clinic testing, subjects perform protocol prescribed activities and rate the intensity of the sensations on a 5-point Likert scale with both Closed Loop On and Off. The average overstimulation intensity scores within each subject are calculated separately for Closed Loop On and Off, and the proportion of subjects with a lower average overstimulation intensity score during Closed Loop On compared to their overstimulation intensity score during Closed Loop Off is calculated with a one-sided 97.5% lower bound. | 30 days from device activation |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Responder Rate for Treatment of Overall Pain | Responder rate defined as a reduction in Overall (back/leg) pain VAS of at least 50%. | 3 months from device activation |
| Responder Rate for Treatment of Low-back Pain |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
18 years of age or older
Candidate is undergoing Medtronic SCS device trial for chronic, intractable pain of the trunk and/or limbs
If being treated for low-back and/or leg pain,
If being treated for upper limb pain - baseline Visual Analog Scale is ≥ 60 mm for upper limb pain
On stable (no change in dose, route, or frequency) prescribed pain medications being used for back and leg pain or upper limb pain, as determined by the investigator, for at least 28 days prior to device trial
Willing and able to provide signed and dated informed consent
Willing and able to comply with all study procedures and visits
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Marc Russo, MD | Genesis Research Services | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sydney Pain Specialists | Bella Vista | New South Wales | 2153 | Australia | ||
| Genesis Research Services |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40378232 | Derived | Mohabbati V, Sullivan R, Yu J, Georgius P, Brooker CD, Siorek M, McClelland NL, Coletti F, Sun X, Franke A, Russo MA. Early outcomes with a flexible ECAP based closed loop using multiplexed spinal cord stimulation waveforms-single-arm study with in-clinic randomized crossover testing. Pain Med. 2025 Nov 1;26(11):773-782. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnaf058. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
94 subjects were enrolled. 19 exited prior to the SCS trial. 75 started the trial with 2 subjects not completing the trial and 4 subjects experiencing an unsuccessful trial. Of the 69 that had a successful trial, 9 exited before implant and 60 were implanted. All implanted subjects received SCS therapy following device activation, and subjects with clear and measurable Evoked Compound Action Potentials (ECAPs) had the option to turn the closed loop feature On.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | All Implanted Subjects | Enrolled subjects who are implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system. Spinal Cord Stimulation System: Implanted neurostimulation system (neurostimulator and leads) with closed loop feature capabilities. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Implant to 30-day Visit |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 30-day Visit to 3-Month Visit |
|
All subjects implanted with a Spinal Cord Stimulator.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | All Implanted Subjects | Enrolled subjects who are implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system. Spinal Cord Stimulation System: Implanted neurostimulation system (neurostimulator and leads) with closed loop feature capabilities. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Reduction in Overstimulation Sensation | The primary outcome is the proportion of low-back and/or leg pain subjects whose average overstimulation intensity score with Closed Loop On is less than their average overstimulation intensity score with Closed Loop Off. During in-clinic testing, subjects perform protocol prescribed activities and rate the intensity of the sensations on a 5-point Likert scale with both Closed Loop On and Off. The average overstimulation intensity scores within each subject are calculated separately for Closed Loop On and Off, and the proportion of subjects with a lower average overstimulation intensity score during Closed Loop On compared to their overstimulation intensity score during Closed Loop Off is calculated with a one-sided 97.5% lower bound. | The pre-specified Primary Analysis Set includes the first 28 low-back and/or leg pain subjects within the All Implanted Subjects Arm with clear and measurable Evoked Compound Action Potentials (ECAPs) who completed in-clinic testing at the 30-day visit. Of the 60 implanted subjects, 2 missed the 30-day visit, 55 completed the 30-day visit, 50 had low-back and/or leg pain and clear and measurable ECAPs, and the first 28 of these subjects are included in the analysis for this objective. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 30 days from device activation |
From Implant through 3 months post activation
All device/therapy-related adverse events (AEs) related to the implanted spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system, accessories, surgical procedures, and therapy were collected. Non-serious, non-device/therapy-related AEs were not collected. All serious AEs were collected regardless of device/therapy-relatedness. AEs were not collected separately by whether the closed loop feature was On or Off; it was pre-specified to report the AE rates through the 3-month visit for all implanted subjects.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | All Implanted Subjects | Enrolled subjects who are implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system. Spinal Cord Stimulation System: Implanted neurostimulation system (neurostimulator and leads) with closed loop feature capabilities. |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical device site infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical device site pain | General disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nancy McClelland | Medtronic Neuromodulation | 1-800-633-8766 | nancy.l.mcclelland@medtronic.com |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot | Yes | No | No | Study Protocol | Feb 24, 2023 | Jul 29, 2024 | Prot_003.pdf |
| SAP | No | Yes | No | Statistical Analysis Plan | Feb 24, 2023 | Jul 29, 2024 | SAP_004.pdf |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D017116 | Low Back Pain |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001416 | Back Pain |
| D010146 | Pain |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Responder rate defined as a reduction in back pain VAS of at least 50%.
| 3 months from device activation |
| Responder Rate for Treatment of Leg Pain | Responder rate defined as a reduction in leg pain VAS of at least 50%. | 3 months from device activation |
| Broadmeadow |
| New South Wales |
| 2292 |
| Australia |
| Australian Medical Research | Hurstville | New South Wales | 2220 | Australia |
| Royal North Shore Hospital | Saint Leonards | New South Wales | 2065 | Australia |
| Sydney Pain Research Centre | Wahroonga | New South Wales | 2076 | Australia |
| Sunshine Coast Clinical Research | Noosa | Queensland | 4567 | Australia |
| Precision Brain Spine and Pain Center | Kew | Victoria | 3101 | Australia |
|
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Primary Location of Pain | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Primary Indication | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Years Since Onset of Pain | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
|
|
|
|
|
| Secondary | Responder Rate for Treatment of Overall Pain | Responder rate defined as a reduction in Overall (back/leg) pain VAS of at least 50%. | All implanted subjects with low-back and/or leg pain who have data at baseline and the 3-month visit. As all subjects were implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system with closed loop feature capabilities, the analysis was pre-specified in the statistical analysis plan to report the combined responder rate for these subjects with data at baseline and the 3-month visit, regardless of whether in-clinic testing of the closed loop feature had been conducted at the 30-day visit. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 3 months from device activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Responder Rate for Treatment of Low-back Pain | Responder rate defined as a reduction in back pain VAS of at least 50%. | All implanted subjects with low-back pain (baseline VAS ≥ 60mm) who have data at baseline and the 3-month visit. As all subjects were implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system with closed loop feature capabilities, the analysis was pre-specified in the statistical analysis plan to report the combined responder rate for these subjects with data at baseline and the 3-month visit, regardless of whether in-clinic testing of the closed loop feature had been conducted at the 30-day visit. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 3 months from device activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Responder Rate for Treatment of Leg Pain | Responder rate defined as a reduction in leg pain VAS of at least 50%. | All implanted subjects with leg pain (baseline VAS ≥ 60mm) who have data at baseline and the 3-month visit. As all subjects were implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system with closed loop feature capabilities, the analysis was pre-specified in the statistical analysis plan to report the combined responder rate for these subjects with data at baseline and the 3-month visit, regardless of whether in-clinic testing of the closed loop feature had been conducted at the 30-day visit. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 3 months from device activation |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 60 |
| 10 |
| 60 |
| 3 |
| 60 |
| Coronary artery occlusion | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Stent-graft endoleak | General disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Medical device site pain | General disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Medical device site hematoma | General disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Staphylococcal bacteremia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Skin laceration | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Intervertebral disc protrusion | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Transient ischemic attack | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Dysponea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA (26.0) | Systematic Assessment |
|
The Institution must ensure the Discloser gives a copy of any proposed Publication drafted by them and/or Personnel involved in the conduct of the Study to the Sponsor at least 40 days The Sponsor may do one of the following
| D013568 |
| Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |