Chronic Low Back PainPhase 2NCT00108550
Chronic Low Back Pain Research Project
A Phase 2 study testing gabapentin in people with Chronic Low Back Pain, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to determine whether gabapentin is efficacious as an analgesic for chronic low back pain. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Low Back Pain
- What is being tested?
- gabapentin
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 108 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2004to Sep 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 21 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Must be resident of the county of San Diego, California
- Ages 21-70 inclusive
- Low back pain (T-6 or below, secondary to degenerative disk or degenerative joint disease) present "on a daily basis" for the previous 6 months or longer, of at least "moderate" intensity determined by Descriptor Differential Scale (DDS) > 7
- English-speaking, literate, able to understand the study and communicate with the study team
- Presently not a candidate for back surgery (one prior back surgery permitted if it was > 5 years ago and resulted in complete relief)
- Discontinued muscle relaxants, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and opioids at least two weeks before screening and agree to discontinue throughout study (can remain on stable dose of NSAIDs)
- If female, not pregnant or lactating; agrees to use reliable contraception throughout the study, and has negative pregnancy test at screening
- Gives informed consent.
Who cannot join
- A major coexisting medical illness (e.g., diabetes, renal or hepatic disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, or class III or IV organic heart disease) that might increase risks of gabapentin, or major surgical or non-surgical intervention for any disorder within the past 12 months, since rehabilitation from treatment may confound study outcomes
- Significant coexisting orthopedic or pain problems; sciatica (pain, weakness, or dysesthesia solely in distribution of a lumbar spinal nerve, with or without reflex change) or back pain due to other disorders (e.g., fibromyalgia, vertebral fracture, osteomyelitis, metastatic cancer, rheumatoid arthritis; spinal stenosis)
- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-IV diagnosis of alcohol or other substance abuse or dependence (within the previous 12 months or positive urine toxicology at screening), current major depression or dysthymia; or lifetime bipolar disorder (I or II) (excluded because gabapentin is antidepressive and antimanic); or major anxiety disorder (e.g., panic disorder; or psychosis; or lifetime presence of cognitive impairment disorder (e.g. dementia)
- History of multiple adverse drug reactions or known allergy to gabapentin
- Use of psychotropics (e.g., antidepressants, anxiolytics), which would need to be continued during the study, or other drugs or agents (i.e., herbal preparations) which might interact with the study drug
- Prior treatment with the study drug
Show all 13Show fewer
- Use of systemic corticosteroids or corticosteroid injections within three months of screening; or concurrent behavioral therapies, chiropractic treatment, or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation unit
- Renal impairment (creatinine > 1.8 mg/dL)
- Hepatic impairment (bilirubin > 1.5 X upper normal limit, or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) or alanine transaminase (ALT) > 2 X upper normal limit)
- Hematologic abnormality (hemoglobin < 9.4 gm/dL; absolute white blood cell (WBC) count < 3000/mm3, platelets < 100,000
- Pregnancy
- Immunosuppression
- Use of experimental drugs or participation in other clinical trials
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego
San Diego, California, 92161
About this study
Official title: Efficacy of Antidepressants in Chronic Back Pain
The purpose of this study is to determine whether gabapentin is efficacious as an analgesic for chronic low back pain.
Read the detailed description
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major health problem for the VA, affecting up to 15% of all veterans. Nationally, its medical and disability costs exceed $50 billion annually. Despite its impact, relatively little research evaluates treatment for CLBP. Wide variation in patterns of care suggests uncertainty over effective therapy. Most chronic back cases are not surgical candidates. The mainstays of medical treatment have been non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, opioids, and antidepressants. Non-steroidal drugs and muscle relaxants are effective for acute but not for chronic back pain. Opioids may provide analgesia but safety limits their use. Tricyclic antidepressants provide modest pain relief, separate from effects on depression. But it is clear additional research is needed to develop more effective pharmacotherapy. One approach favored by many authorities is determining if agents effective for one type of chronic pain syndrome (e.g., diabetic neuropathy) can be generalized to other syndromes, like chronic back pain. Another is to identify effective drug combinations, based on selecting drugs with differing therapeutic mechanisms.
This research is a program of rigorous randomized clinical trials testing the efficacy of antidepressants for analgesia in chronic back pain. Because chronic pain is a complex disorder, the program features a multidisciplinary research team, involving specialists in psychiatry, orthopedic surgery, psychology, anesthesiology, clinical pharmacology, and biomathematics. The research has both pragmatic and explanatory aims. Our strategy has been to test antidepressants with differing, and selective properties in an attempt to isolate therapeutic mechanisms. Thus, we began with trials using selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), rather than those with dual noradrenergic and serotonergic effects (e.g., amitriptyline, imipramine). To ensure applicability of results, we have used rigorous diagnostic procedures to identify patients with chronic back pain due to degenerative disk disease. To enhance generalizability we recruit primary care patients rather than tertiary pain clinic samples. Patients without major depression are studied to examine analgesia separate from antidepressant effects. Secondary outcomes address function and life quality.
We have conducted three controlled trials using identical recruitment and assessment methodology. The first, comparing a noradrenergic antidepressant (nortriptyline) with placebo, indicated that the noradrenergic agent provided clinically relevant analgesia. The second was a head-to-head comparison of a selective noradrenergic agent (maprotiline) with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI, paroxetine). The noradrenergic agent outperformed the SSRI, which was equivalent to placebo. To clarify these results we explored whether efficacy might be evident only at specific drug concentrations. Therefore, the third study, has a prospective concentration design comparing the most potent and selective noradrenergic antidepressant (desipramine) to the standard SSRI, fluoxetine. Subjects were randomized to placebo or predetermined concentration windows reflecting low, medium, and high exposure to study drugs and followed for 12 weeks. Interim analysis suggests that low concentration desipramine outperforms placebo (p<0.05). It is also superior to mid-concentration and high exposure desipramine--as well as all exposure levels of the SSRI, which are equivalent to placebo.
In sum, all three studies supported noradrenergic analgesia in CLBP, and the two studies that evaluated SSRIs failed to find analgesia. This suggests noradrenergic activity, perhaps within a therapeutic window, may be primarily responsible for back pain analgesia. These findings have led us away from studies proposing combining noradrenergic and serotonergic agents. An alternative approach which builds on these data, but first employs another class of agents, seems reasonable. This strategy is to assess if gabapentin, a calcium channel blocker agent with demonstrated efficacy in neuropathic pain, can be extended to chronic back pain.
We conducted a double-blind, randomized assignment, 12-week, placebo controlled clinical trial of the efficacy of gabapentin. Non-depressed chronic low back pain patients (N = 130) will be randomized to placebo or high dose gabapentin (3600 mg/day or maximum tolerable dose). Analysis was by intent to treat. The primary efficacy assessment is mean pain intensity (Descriptor Differential Scale, DDS) at exit. Secondary outcomes are function and life quality (Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form-36, Quality of Well-Being Scale). Safety evaluation includes rating adverse events (Scandinavian Society of Psychopharmacology Committee on Clinical Investiagations Side Effects Rating Scale, UKU), standardized physical examination, and clinical laboratory testing. Results could provide explanatory insight into mechanisms of back pain, and address the pragmatic clinical need by primary care providers and others for effective therapy.
- Conditions
- Chronic Low Back Pain
- Being tested
- gabapentin, Inert placebo
- Keywords
- analgesia, antidepressant agents, back pain, pain
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia, Back Pain, Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
gabapentinDrug
Also called Neurontin
Gabapentin 300m on Day 1, with daily or weekly increase to 3600 mg (maximum) by mouth by Week 5 of the 12-week trial
Inert placeboDrug
Also called sugar pill
Inactive placebo capsule, one capsule on Day 1 with daily or weekly increase to 9 capsules daily by Week 5 of the 12-week trial
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Experimental | Gabapentin 300 mg orally three times daily up to a maximum of 1200 mg orally three times daily for 12 weeks Receives: Drug: gabapentin |
| 2 | Sham comparator | Inert placebo capsules identical in size and shape to the experimental capsules, one to three capsules taken orally three times daily for 12 weeks Receives: Drug: Inert placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Transformed Descriptor Differential Scale-Pain Intensity Scores Adjusted for Time
Self-report measure of "current" pain intensity of chronic back pain. Participants rate pain on a 20 point scale as being greater or less intense relative to 12 adjectival descriptor word anchors (eg, greater or less than "faint," "moderate," "strong"). Scores range from 0 to 20 with higher scores indicating higher pain intensity. Prior to analysis an order-preserving mean-matching variance-stabilizing transformation was applied to this measure placing it on a continuous 0-1.5 scale. The single values reported below represent adjusted means of transformed pain intensity over all time points.
Measured: Baseline to Week 12 with Interim Measurement at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9
Secondary outcomes (1)
Roland and Morris Disability Index Scores Adjusted for Time
This questionnaire measures disability in everyday function due to back pain. It is a 24-item checklist asking patients to endorse whether or not back pain limits activities they normally do (eg, "I stay at home most of the time because of my back"). Scores range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater disability in everyday function due to back pain. The single values reported below represent adjusted means of scores over all time points.
Measured: Baseline to Week 12 with Interim Measurement at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Apr 2005 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2004
- Primary completionJul 2009
- Study completionSep 2009
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic Low Back PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 108 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- US Department of Veterans Affairs
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Joseph H. Atkinson, MD, Principal investigator, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00108550
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CLNA-013-04S
- Status last verified
- Dec 2013
- First submitted
- 15 Apr 2005
- Last updated
- 10 Feb 2014
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Atkinson JH, Slater MA, Capparelli EV, Patel SM, Wolfson T, Gamst A, Abramson IS, Wallace MS, Funk SD, Rutledge TR, Wetherell JL, Matthews SC, Zisook S, Garfin SR. A randomized controlled trial of gabapentin for chronic low back pain with and without a radiating component. Pain. 2016 Jul;157(7):1499-1507. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000554.
PubMed 26963844
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Feb 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy of Antidepressants in Chronic Back Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00108550
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CLNA-013-04S
- Conditions
- Chronic Low Back Pain
- Keywords
- analgesia, antidepressant agents, back pain, pain
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 108 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- US Department of Veterans AffairsUS federal agency
- Study start
- Oct 2004
- Primary completion
- Jul 2009 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2009 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Apr 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 10 Feb 2014
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether gabapentin is efficacious as an analgesic for chronic low back pain.
Detailed description
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major health problem for the VA, affecting up to 15% of all veterans. Nationally, its medical and disability costs exceed $50 billion annually. Despite its impact, relatively little research evaluates treatment for CLBP. Wide variation in patterns of care suggests uncertainty over effective therapy. Most chronic back cases are not surgical candidates. The mainstays of medical treatment have been non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, opioids, and antidepressants. Non-steroidal drugs and muscle relaxants are effective for acute but not for chronic back pain. Opioids may provide analgesia but safety limits their use. Tricyclic antidepressants provide modest pain relief, separate from effects on depression. But it is clear additional research is needed to develop more effective pharmacotherapy. One approach favored by many authorities is determining if agents effective for one type of chronic pain syndrome (e.g., diabetic neuropathy) can be generalized to other syndromes, like chronic back pain. Another is to identify effective drug combinations, based on selecting drugs with differing therapeutic mechanisms.
This research is a program of rigorous randomized clinical trials testing the efficacy of antidepressants for analgesia in chronic back pain. Because chronic pain is a complex disorder, the program features a multidisciplinary research team, involving specialists in psychiatry, orthopedic surgery, psychology, anesthesiology, clinical pharmacology, and biomathematics. The research has both pragmatic and explanatory aims. Our strategy has been to test antidepressants with differing, and selective properties in an attempt to isolate therapeutic mechanisms. Thus, we began with trials using selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), rather than those with dual noradrenergic and serotonergic effects (e.g., amitriptyline, imipramine). To ensure applicability of results, we have used rigorous diagnostic procedures to identify patients with chronic back pain due to degenerative disk disease. To enhance generalizability we recruit primary care patients rather than tertiary pain clinic samples. Patients without major depression are studied to examine analgesia separate from antidepressant effects. Secondary outcomes address function and life quality.
We have conducted three controlled trials using identical recruitment and assessment methodology. The first, comparing a noradrenergic antidepressant (nortriptyline) with placebo, indicated that the noradrenergic agent provided clinically relevant analgesia. The second was a head-to-head comparison of a selective noradrenergic agent (maprotiline) with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI, paroxetine). The noradrenergic agent outperformed the SSRI, which was equivalent to placebo. To clarify these results we explored whether efficacy might be evident only at specific drug concentrations. Therefore, the third study, has a prospective concentration design comparing the most potent and selective noradrenergic antidepressant (desipramine) to the standard SSRI, fluoxetine. Subjects were randomized to placebo or predetermined concentration windows reflecting low, medium, and high exposure to study drugs and followed for 12 weeks. Interim analysis suggests that low concentration desipramine outperforms placebo (p<0.05). It is also superior to mid-concentration and high exposure desipramine--as well as all exposure levels of the SSRI, which are equivalent to placebo.
In sum, all three studies supported noradrenergic analgesia in CLBP, and the two studies that evaluated SSRIs failed to find analgesia. This suggests noradrenergic activity, perhaps within a therapeutic window, may be primarily responsible for back pain analgesia. These findings have led us away from studies proposing combining noradrenergic and serotonergic agents. An alternative approach which builds on these data, but first employs another class of agents, seems reasonable. This strategy is to assess if gabapentin, a calcium channel blocker agent with demonstrated efficacy in neuropathic pain, can be extended to chronic back pain.
We conducted a double-blind, randomized assignment, 12-week, placebo controlled clinical trial of the efficacy of gabapentin. Non-depressed chronic low back pain patients (N = 130) will be randomized to placebo or high dose gabapentin (3600 mg/day or maximum tolerable dose). Analysis was by intent to treat. The primary efficacy assessment is mean pain intensity (Descriptor Differential Scale, DDS) at exit. Secondary outcomes are function and life quality (Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form-36, Quality of Well-Being Scale). Safety evaluation includes rating adverse events (Scandinavian Society of Psychopharmacology Committee on Clinical Investiagations Side Effects Rating Scale, UKU), standardized physical examination, and clinical laboratory testing. Results could provide explanatory insight into mechanisms of back pain, and address the pragmatic clinical need by primary care providers and others for effective therapy.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Experimental | Drug: gabapentinGabapentin 300 mg orally three times daily up to a maximum of 1200 mg orally three times daily for 12 weeks |
| 2 | Sham comparator | Drug: Inert placeboInert placebo capsules identical in size and shape to the experimental capsules, one to three capsules taken orally three times daily for 12 weeks |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Must be resident of the county of San Diego, California
- Ages 21-70 inclusive
- Low back pain (T-6 or below, secondary to degenerative disk or degenerative joint disease) present "on a daily basis" for the previous 6 months or longer, of at least "moderate" intensity determined by Descriptor Differential Scale (DDS) > 7
- English-speaking, literate, able to understand the study and communicate with the study team
- Presently not a candidate for back surgery (one prior back surgery permitted if it was > 5 years ago and resulted in complete relief)
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- A major coexisting medical illness (e.g., diabetes, renal or hepatic disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, or class III or IV organic heart disease) that might increase risks of gabapentin, or major surgical or non-surgical intervention for any disorder within the past 12 months, since rehabilitation from treatment may confound study outcomes
- Significant coexisting orthopedic or pain problems; sciatica (pain, weakness, or dysesthesia solely in distribution of a lumbar spinal nerve, with or without reflex change) or back pain due to other disorders (e.g., fibromyalgia, vertebral fracture, osteomyelitis, metastatic cancer, rheumatoid arthritis; spinal stenosis)
- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-IV diagnosis of alcohol or other substance abuse or dependence (within the previous 12 months or positive urine toxicology at screening), current major depression or dysthymia; or lifetime bipolar disorder (I or II) (excluded because gabapentin is antidepressive and antimanic); or major anxiety disorder (e.g., panic disorder; or psychosis; or lifetime presence of cognitive impairment disorder (e.g. dementia)
- History of multiple adverse drug reactions or known allergy to gabapentin
- Use of psychotropics (e.g., antidepressants, anxiolytics), which would need to be continued during the study, or other drugs or agents (i.e., herbal preparations) which might interact with the study drug
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| gabapentinAlso: NeurontinGabapentin 300m on Day 1, with daily or weekly increase to 3600 mg (maximum) by mouth by Week 5 of the 12-week trial | Drug | 1 |
| Inert placeboAlso: sugar pillInactive placebo capsule, one capsule on Day 1 with daily or weekly increase to 9 capsules daily by Week 5 of the 12-week trial | Drug | 2 |
Primary outcome
Transformed Descriptor Differential Scale-Pain Intensity Scores Adjusted for Time
Time frame: Baseline to Week 12 with Interim Measurement at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9
Self-report measure of "current" pain intensity of chronic back pain. Participants rate pain on a 20 point scale as being greater or less intense relative to 12 adjectival descriptor word anchors (eg, greater or less than "faint," "moderate," "strong"). Scores range from 0 to 20 with higher scores indicating higher pain intensity. Prior to analysis an order-preserving mean-matching variance-stabilizing transformation was applied to this measure placing it on a continuous 0-1.5 scale. The single values reported below represent adjusted means of transformed pain intensity over all time points.
1 secondary outcome
Roland and Morris Disability Index Scores Adjusted for Time
Time frame: Baseline to Week 12 with Interim Measurement at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Feb 2014.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 26963844Atkinson JH, Slater MA, Capparelli EV, Patel SM, Wolfson T, Gamst A, Abramson IS, Wallace MS, Funk SD, Rutledge TR, Wetherell JL, Matthews SC, Zisook S, Garfin SR. A randomized controlled trial of gabapentin for chronic low back pain with and without a radiating component. Pain. 2016 Jul;157(7):1499-1507. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000554.
Related trials for Chronic Low Back Pain
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
PRP Versus NP Injections for Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain
Discogenic Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Empowering Pain Psychology Access and Collaboration (EPPAC) to Improve Treatment Engagement Among Medicaid-insured Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain
Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP)
Not yet recruiting
Gamified Home-Based Core Neuromuscular Training for Chronic Low Back Pain
Low Back Pain, Core Muscles
Not yet recruiting
Dual-Task Core Stabilization Training in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Psilocybin-Assisted Physical Therapy in Chronic Low Back Pain
Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP), Physical Therapy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Joseph H. Atkinson, MD principal investigator
VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing gabapentin in people with Chronic Low Back Pain, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 1 site in United States.
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 8 inclusion and 13 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 10 Feb 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. 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 10 Feb 2014). 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?
Transformed Descriptor Differential Scale-Pain Intensity Scores Adjusted for Time (time frame: Baseline to Week 12 with Interim Measurement at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00108550, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 10 Feb 2014.