Post-operative PainNCT04742790
QSPainRelief-patientCNS : Clinical Biomarkers of Nociception, Sedation and Cognition
A study testing Scalp electroencephalography (EEG), Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) and Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300) in people with Post-operative Pain, run by Université Catholique de Louvain at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
QSPainRelief-patientCNS is a monocentric prospective longitudinal study conducted in patients suffering from disabling post-surgical pain for which the treating physician is about to prescribe a given drug combination for the treatment of their pain with the aim of identifying measures of drug-induced effects on CNS… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Post-operative Pain
- What is being tested?
- Scalp electroencephalography (EEG), Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) and Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 180 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- 15 Mar 2021to 30 Sep 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 18-75 years.
- Presence of disabling post-operative pain for more than two weeks following thoracotomy, sternotomy or breast cancer surgery.
- Current treatment of their post-operative pain with an opioid analgesic (along with possible other drugs).
- Decision by the treating physician to introduce an additional non-opioid treatment for their post-operative pain such as (but not necessarily) an antiepileptic or an anti-depressant.
- Capacity to understand and voluntarily sign an informed consent form.
Who cannot join
- Insufficient French language skills.
- Planned chemotherapy, hormonotherapy or radiotherapy during the time interval between Visits 1 and 2.
- Clinically evident psychiatric disease that is likely to interfere with the study, according to judgment by the investigator.
- History of peripheral or central nervous system disease before the surgical intervention.
- Dermatological condition involving the sensory testing areas.
- Severe alcohol use disorder (as defined in DSM-5).
Show all 12Show fewer
- Severe sedative, hypnotic of anxiolytic-related use disorder (as defined in DSM-5).
- Any other mild, moderate or severe substance use disorder except tobacco and caffeine (as defined in DSM-5).
- Consumption of recreational drugs, including cannabis, in the last 4 weeks prior to the study.
- Signs of polyneuropathy at clinical examination.
- Signs of a neurological deficit due to a CNS lesion or dysfunction at clinical examination.
- Any other reason to exclude the subject because it may interfere with the study, according to judgment by the investigator. The reason will be documented.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Belgium1 site
Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc
Brussels, 1200
Patricia Lavand'homme, MD, PhD, +32 2 764 47 33, patricia.lavandhomme@uclouvain.be
Alexandre Stouffs, MD, +32 2 764 47 33, alexandre.stouffs@uclouvain.be
About this study
Official title: Clinical Calibration and Evaluation of the QSPainRelief Platform in Patients With Disabling Pain Using Functional Biomarkers of Nociception, Sedation and Cognition
QSPainRelief-patientCNS is a monocentric prospective longitudinal study conducted in patients suffering from disabling post-surgical pain for which the treating physician is about to prescribe a given drug combination for the treatment of their pain with the aim of identifying measures of drug-induced effects on CNS activity that could be used as biomarkers of real-life clinical outcome, both in terms of desired treatment effects (treatment-induced pain relief) but also in terms of undesired treatment effects (treatment-induced sedation and treatment-induced cognitive dysfunction).
Read the detailed description
QSPainRelief-patientCNS is one of three clinical studies that will be conducted as part of the QSPainRelief project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement 848068; http://qspainrelief.eu).
Chronic pain is a complex disease affecting about 20% of Europeans, and up to 60% of patients with chronic pain do not experience adequate pain relief from currently available analgesic combinational therapies and/or suffer confounding adverse effects. Of the many conceivable combinations, only a few have been studied in formal clinical trials. Thus, physicians have to rely on clinical experience when treating chronic pain patients. The vision of the QSPainRelief project is that alternative novel drug combinations with improved analgesic and reduced adverse effects can be identified and assessed by mechanism-based Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) in silico modelling. The QSPainRelief consortium will setup, calibrate and validate an in silico QSPainRelief platform which integrates recently developed (1) physiologically based pharmacokinetic models to quantitate and adequately predict drug pharmacokinetics in human CNS, (2) target-binding kinetic models; (3) cellular signaling models and (4) a proprietary neural circuit model to quantitate the drug effects on the activity of relevant brain neuronal networks, that also adequately predicts clinical outcome.
Calibration of the QSPainRelief platform modelling the biological processes and neuronal circuits underlying the pain relief and adverse effects induced by drug combinations requires patient data on how different drug combinations affect the central processing of nociceptive input, the central processes underlying pain modulation, as well as the central nervous system (CNS) networks underlying drug-induced adverse effects. After calibration of the QSPainRelief platform, additional patient data is required to evaluate the ability of the platform to actually predict CNS effects of drug combinations in patients. Finally, real-world evidence is needed to relate the effects of drug combinations on CNS activity with the therapeutic and adverse effects self-reported by the patients.
The aims of the QSPainRelief-patientCNS study are thus two-fold.
The first aim is to obtain data from a first set of 60 patients to calibrate the QSPainRelief platform, and from a second set of 120 patients to evaluate the ability of the QSPainRelief platform to predict therapeutic and adverse effects of drug combinations. It will focus on pain relief and its impact on daily life activities as therapeutic effects, and on drug-induced sedation, drug-induced cognitive dysfunction (memory and attention) and pain medication misuse as adverse effects. These adverse effects have been chosen because (1) CNS biomarkers sensitive to drug-induced sedation and drug-induced cognitive dysfunction can be readily obtained using non-invasive measurements of the electroencephalogram (EEG) and (2) the chosen adverse effects can be assessed in patients after a short treatment period using validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
The second aim is to identify measures of drug-induced effects on CNS activity that could be used as biomarkers of real-life clinical outcome, both in terms of desired treatment effects (treatment-induced pain relief) but also in terms of undesired treatment effects (treatment-induced sedation and treatment-induced cognitive dysfunction).
- Conditions
- Post-operative Pain
- Being tested
- Scalp electroencephalography (EEG), Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs), Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300), Cervical somatosensory-evoked potentials, Pupillometry
- Keywords
- acute pain, persistent pain, sedation
- Medical subject headings
- Pain, Postoperative, Acute Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Scalp electroencephalography (EEG)Diagnostic test
Also called Biomarker of sedation
Resting EEG will be recorded before initiation of the combination treatment (visit 1) and 7-10 days after treatment (visit 2). Drug-induced sedation-related changes in the EEG frequency spectrum. Five minutes of resting EEG eyes-open will be recorded in a quiet room while participants are asked to focus on an image displayed on a wall. Then, they will be asked to close their eyes for an additional 2 minutes. The alpha power ratio eyes open/eyes closed will be computed (alpha attenuation coefficient; Kaida et al., 2006). Changes in this coefficient will be used as a measure of drug-induced sedation.
Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs)Diagnostic test
Also called Biomarker of nociception (brain)
Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Short pulses (50-100 ms) of radiant heat generated by a C02 laser stimulator will be applied to the skin of the left or right hand dorm to briefly and selectively activate heat-sensitive pain receptors. A concomitant EEG recordings will be used to measure the amplitude and latency of the elicited laser-evoked potentials. Changes in LEP amplitude (expressed as percentage of change) will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on the state of the thermonociceptive system.
Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300)Diagnostic test
Also called Biomarker of cognition
Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Short-lasting auditory tones will be delivered using a three-stimulus oddball paradigm combining standard tones (90% of stimuli), slightly different target tones that the subject must attend and detect (10% of stimuli), and strongly different distractor non-target tones (10% of stimuli). The stimuli will be delivered binaurally using headphones. Participants will be instructed to press a button when they detect a target tone, and to ignore the standard and distractor non-target tones. The EEG recordings will be used to measure the amplitude and latency of the cognitive P3a and P3b potentials (Komerchero \& Polich 1999). Changes in P3a/P3b amplitude will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on cognition (expressed as percentage of change).
Cervical somatosensory-evoked potentialsDiagnostic test
Also called Biomarker of nociception (spinal)
Cervical spinal-cord evoked potentials will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. The responses will be elicited by transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the median nerve. The N13 component of this response is mediated by large myelinated non-nociceptive fibers and reflects a segmental postsynaptic response of dorsal horn interneurons at the level of lumbar spinal cord (Cruccu et al., 2008). Changes in magnitude of the N13 will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on spinal cord function (expressed as percentage of change).
PupillometryDiagnostic test
Pupillometry measurements will be performed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Pupillometry has been proposed as a method to assess opioid pharmacodynamics. The extent of pupil dilatation can provide an index of nociceptive input via autonomic innervation of the iris muscles, while the extent of the attenuation of this pupillary response during exposure to opioid analgesics could provide an index of pharmacological effects reflecting the extent of opioid receptor occupancy in the CNS. Pupillometry (static pupil diameter, variability of pupil diameter [variation coefficient of pupillary dilation, VCPD, Charier et al. 2017]), light-evoked speed of pupil constriction [maximum pupil constriction velocity, PCV, Connely et al., 2014]) will be measured using a handheld pupillometry device routinely used for clinical evaluations.
Saccadic Peak VelocityDiagnostic test
The saccadic peak velocity (SPV; m/s) will be measured before before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Saccadic peak velocity is one of the most sensitive parameters for sedation. Recording of eye movements will be performed in a quiet room with dimmed lightning. Average values of saccadic peak velocity (expressed as degrees/second) of all correct saccades will be measured.
Adaptive tracking testDiagnostic test
The test will be performed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Adaptive tracking is a pursuit-tracking task sensitive to impairment of eye-hand coordination by drugs. It has been proven useful for measuring CNS effects of alcohol, various other psychoactive drugs, and sleep deprivation.
Body Sway TestDiagnostic test
Body sway will be assessed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment, using a body sway meter and with eyes closed. The body sway meter allows measurement of body movements in a single plane, providing a measure of postural stability. The method has been used to demonstrate effects of sleep deprivation, ethanol and psychoactive drugs. All body movements over a 2-min period are integrated and expressed as millimeters of sway.
N-back working memory testDiagnostic test
Working memory performance will be assessed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. In this test, a series of letters are shown to the participant on a computer screen. The test includes three conditions with increased working memory load. The "0-back" condition simply requires to indicate whether the presented letter is the letter "X" or another letter. In the "1-back" condition, participants are requested to indicate whether the displayed letter is identical to the preceding letter. In the "2-back" condition, participants are required indicate whether the letter is repeated with one other letter in between (e.g., B … C … B).
Patient-reported outcomesOther
Before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment, but also daily between the two visits, 14 days, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after treatment initiation, patient-reported outcomes will be collected to assess clinical effects and side-effects of the combination treatmen These include the short form of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the PROMIS PQ-NEURO score for neuropathic pain, the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS), and the PROMIS Neuro-QOL self-assessment of cognitive functioning.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Patients | Experimental | The study will recruit volunteers (1) suffering from disabling post-operative pain for more than two weeks following surgery (thoracotomy, sternotomy and breast cancer surgery), (2) currently being treated for their post-operative pain with an opioid analgesic - along with possible other treatments - and (3) for which the treating physician is about to introduce an additional non-opioid drug for the treatment of their pain (e.g. an antiepileptic or an anti-depressant). Receives: Diagnostic Test: Scalp electroencephalography (EEG); Diagnostic Test: Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs); Diagnostic Test: Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300); Diagnostic Test: Cervical somatosensory-evoked potentials; Diagnostic Test: Pupillometry; Diagnostic Test: Saccadic Peak Velocity; Diagnostic Test: Adaptive tracking test; Diagnostic Test: Body Sway Test; Diagnostic Test: N-back working memory test; Other: Patient-reported outcomes |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Correlation between change in magnitude of laser-evoked brain potentials (LEP) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity score
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in the magnitude of LEPs (in microvolts) predicts pain relief, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in magnitude of LEPs between Visit 1 and Visit 2 (expressed as percentage of change between the two visits) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in the pain severity score obtained from the BPI (score between 0 and 40; Gjeilo et al., 2007) between Visit 1 and Month 3.
Measured: three months
Correlation between change in the alpha attenuation coefficient (AAC) and change in the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS)
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in AAC (ratio between alpha-band power eyes closed vs. eyes open; Kaida et al., 2006) predicts self-reported sleepiness, the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug combination change in the AAC measured in the resting EEG between Visits 1 and 2 will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported sleepiness assessed using the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS; score between 1 and 7) between Visits 1 and 2.
Measured: 10 days
Correlation between change in magnitude of cognitive P3b potential and change in the PROMIS Neuro-QOL score for cognitive function
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in magnitude of the P3b component of auditory-evoked potentials (in microvolts; Komerchero \& Polich 1999) predicts self-reported cognitive dysfunction, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in P3b magnitude between Visits 1 and 2 (expressed as percentage of change) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported cognitive dysfunction assessed using the short-form cognitive function measurement of the PROMIS Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) between Visits 1 and 2 (standardized T score for "cognitive function", having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in a reference population).
Measured: 10 days
Secondary outcomes (5)
Correlation between change in magnitude of the N13 spinal-cord evoked potential and change in the PQ-NEURO score for neuropathic pain
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in magnitude of the N13 spinal-cord evoked potential (in microvolts; Cruccu et al., 2008) predicts changes in self-reported signs of neuropathic pain, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in amplitude of the N13 (expressed as percentage of change) between Visits 1 and 2 will be correlated to the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in the PROMIS measure of neuropathic pain quality (PQ-NEURO ; Askew et al. 2016) between Visits 1 and 2 (standardized T score with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 in a reference population).
Measured: 10 days
Correlation between change in the variation coefficient of pupillary dilation (VCPD) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in the VCPD (Charier et al., 2017) predicts pain relief, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in VCPD between Visits 1 and 2 will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in the pain severity score obtained from the BPI (score between 0 and 40; Gjeilo et al., 2007) between Visits 1 and 2.
Measured: 10 days
Correlation between change in pupil constriction velocity (PCV) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in light-evoked PCV (in mm/s; Connely et al., 2014) predicts pain relief, the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in PCV between Visits 1 and 2 (mm/s) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in the pain severity score obtained from the BPI (score between 0 and 40; Gjeilo et al., 2007) between Visits 1 and 2.
Measured: 10 days
Correlation between change in saccadic peak velocity (SPV) and change in the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS)
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in SPV predicts self-reported sleepiness, the post-drug-combination vs pre-drug combination change in SPV (m/s) between Visits 1 and 2 (expressed as percentage of change) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported sleepiness assessed using the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS; score between 1 and 7) between Visits 1 and 2.
Measured: 10 days
Correlation between change in performance of the 2-back working memory task (2-WM) and change in the PROMIS Neuro-QOL score for cognitive function
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in performance of the 2-WM (expressed as the discrimination index d-prime; Haatveit et al., 2010) predicts self-reported cognitive dysfunction, the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in performance between Visits 1 and 2 will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported cognitive dysfunction assessed using the short-form cognitive function measurement of the PROMIS Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) between Visits 1 and 2 (standardized T score for "cognitive function", having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in a reference population).
Measured: 10 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Feb 2021
- Study start15 Mar 2021 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 Sep 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Sep 2024 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Post-operative PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Université Catholique de LouvainThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Model description
- Monocentric prospective longitudinal study
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 180 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Université Catholique de Louvain
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04742790
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- QSPainRelief-patientCNS
- Other IDs
- VER.01-30.06.2020
- Status last verified
- Feb 2021
- First submitted
- 26 Jan 2021
- Last updated
- 8 Feb 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Gjeilo KH, Stenseth R, Wahba A, Lydersen S, Klepstad P. Validation of the brief pain inventory in patients six months after cardiac surgery. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Dec;34(6):648-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.01.010. Epub 2007 Jul 16.
PubMed 17629665Kaida K, Takahashi M, Akerstedt T, Nakata A, Otsuka Y, Haratani T, Fukasawa K. Validation of the Karolinska sleepiness scale against performance and EEG variables. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Jul;117(7):1574-81. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.03.011. Epub 2006 May 6.
PubMed 16679057Comerchero MD, Polich J. P3a and P3b from typical auditory and visual stimuli. Clin Neurophysiol. 1999 Jan;110(1):24-30. doi: 10.1016/s0168-5597(98)00033-1.
PubMed 10348317Cruccu G, Aminoff MJ, Curio G, Guerit JM, Kakigi R, Mauguiere F, Rossini PM, Treede RD, Garcia-Larrea L. Recommendations for the clinical use of somatosensory-evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Aug;119(8):1705-1719. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.03.016. Epub 2008 May 16.
PubMed 18486546Askew RL, Cook KF, Keefe FJ, Nowinski CJ, Cella D, Revicki DA, Morgan DeWitt EM, Michaud K, Trence DL, Amtmann D. A PROMIS Measure of Neuropathic Pain Quality. Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):623-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.02.009. Epub 2016 Apr 6.
PubMed 27565279Charier DJ, Zantour D, Pichot V, Chouchou F, Barthelemy JM, Roche F, Molliex SB. Assessing Pain Using the Variation Coefficient of Pupillary Diameter. J Pain. 2017 Nov;18(11):1346-1353. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.06.006. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
PubMed 28711635Connelly MA, Brown JT, Kearns GL, Anderson RA, St Peter SD, Neville KA. Pupillometry: a non-invasive technique for pain assessment in paediatric patients. Arch Dis Child. 2014 Dec;99(12):1125-31. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2014-306286. Epub 2014 Sep 3.
PubMed 25187497Haatveit BC, Sundet K, Hugdahl K, Ueland T, Melle I, Andreassen OA. The validity of d prime as a working memory index: results from the "Bergen n-back task". J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010 Oct;32(8):871-80. doi: 10.1080/13803391003596421. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
PubMed 20383801
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Feb 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Clinical Calibration and Evaluation of the QSPainRelief Platform in Patients With Disabling Pain Using Functional Biomarkers of Nociception, Sedation and Cognition
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04742790
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- QSPainRelief-patientCNS
- Conditions
- Post-operative Pain
- Keywords
- acute pain, persistent pain, sedation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 180 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Université Catholique de LouvainUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc- Université Catholique de Louvain
- Study start
- 15 Mar 2021 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2024 (estimated)
- First posted
- 8 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
QSPainRelief-patientCNS is a monocentric prospective longitudinal study conducted in patients suffering from disabling post-surgical pain for which the treating physician is about to prescribe a given drug combination for the treatment of their pain with the aim of identifying measures of drug-induced effects on CNS activity that could be used as biomarkers of real-life clinical outcome, both in terms of desired treatment effects (treatment-induced pain relief) but also in terms of undesired treatment effects (treatment-induced sedation and treatment-induced cognitive dysfunction).
Detailed description
QSPainRelief-patientCNS is one of three clinical studies that will be conducted as part of the QSPainRelief project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement 848068; http://qspainrelief.eu).
Chronic pain is a complex disease affecting about 20% of Europeans, and up to 60% of patients with chronic pain do not experience adequate pain relief from currently available analgesic combinational therapies and/or suffer confounding adverse effects. Of the many conceivable combinations, only a few have been studied in formal clinical trials. Thus, physicians have to rely on clinical experience when treating chronic pain patients. The vision of the QSPainRelief project is that alternative novel drug combinations with improved analgesic and reduced adverse effects can be identified and assessed by mechanism-based Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) in silico modelling. The QSPainRelief consortium will setup, calibrate and validate an in silico QSPainRelief platform which integrates recently developed (1) physiologically based pharmacokinetic models to quantitate and adequately predict drug pharmacokinetics in human CNS, (2) target-binding kinetic models; (3) cellular signaling models and (4) a proprietary neural circuit model to quantitate the drug effects on the activity of relevant brain neuronal networks, that also adequately predicts clinical outcome.
Calibration of the QSPainRelief platform modelling the biological processes and neuronal circuits underlying the pain relief and adverse effects induced by drug combinations requires patient data on how different drug combinations affect the central processing of nociceptive input, the central processes underlying pain modulation, as well as the central nervous system (CNS) networks underlying drug-induced adverse effects. After calibration of the QSPainRelief platform, additional patient data is required to evaluate the ability of the platform to actually predict CNS effects of drug combinations in patients. Finally, real-world evidence is needed to relate the effects of drug combinations on CNS activity with the therapeutic and adverse effects self-reported by the patients.
The aims of the QSPainRelief-patientCNS study are thus two-fold.
The first aim is to obtain data from a first set of 60 patients to calibrate the QSPainRelief platform, and from a second set of 120 patients to evaluate the ability of the QSPainRelief platform to predict therapeutic and adverse effects of drug combinations. It will focus on pain relief and its impact on daily life activities as therapeutic effects, and on drug-induced sedation, drug-induced cognitive dysfunction (memory and attention) and pain medication misuse as adverse effects. These adverse effects have been chosen because (1) CNS biomarkers sensitive to drug-induced sedation and drug-induced cognitive dysfunction can be readily obtained using non-invasive measurements of the electroencephalogram (EEG) and (2) the chosen adverse effects can be assessed in patients after a short treatment period using validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
The second aim is to identify measures of drug-induced effects on CNS activity that could be used as biomarkers of real-life clinical outcome, both in terms of desired treatment effects (treatment-induced pain relief) but also in terms of undesired treatment effects (treatment-induced sedation and treatment-induced cognitive dysfunction).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- Monocentric prospective longitudinal study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Patients | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: Scalp electroencephalography (EEG), Diagnostic Test: Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs), Diagnostic Test: Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300), Diagnostic Test: Cervical somatosensory-evoked potentials, Diagnostic Test: Pupillometry, Diagnostic Test: Saccadic Peak Velocity, Diagnostic Test: Adaptive tracking test, Diagnostic Test: Body Sway Test, Diagnostic Test: N-back working memory test, Other: Patient-reported outcomesThe study will recruit volunteers (1) suffering from disabling post-operative pain for more than two weeks following surgery (thoracotomy, sternotomy and breast cancer surgery), (2) currently being treated for their post-operative pain with an opioid analgesic - along with possible other treatments - and (3) for which the treating physician is about to introduce an additional non-opioid drug for the treatment of their pain (e.g. an antiepileptic or an anti-depressant). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Aged 18-75 years.
- Presence of disabling post-operative pain for more than two weeks following thoracotomy, sternotomy or breast cancer surgery.
- Current treatment of their post-operative pain with an opioid analgesic (along with possible other drugs).
- Decision by the treating physician to introduce an additional non-opioid treatment for their post-operative pain such as (but not necessarily) an antiepileptic or an anti-depressant.
- Capacity to understand and voluntarily sign an informed consent form.
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Insufficient French language skills.
- Planned chemotherapy, hormonotherapy or radiotherapy during the time interval between Visits 1 and 2.
- Clinically evident psychiatric disease that is likely to interfere with the study, according to judgment by the investigator.
- History of peripheral or central nervous system disease before the surgical intervention.
- Dermatological condition involving the sensory testing areas.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Scalp electroencephalography (EEG)Also: Biomarker of sedationResting EEG will be recorded before initiation of the combination treatment (visit 1) and 7-10 days after treatment (visit 2). Drug-induced sedation-related changes in the EEG frequency spectrum. Five minutes of resting EEG eyes-open will be recorded in a quiet room while participants are asked to focus on an image displayed on a wall. Then, they will be asked to close their eyes for an additional 2 minutes. The alpha power ratio eyes open/eyes closed will be computed (alpha attenuation coefficient; Kaida et al., 2006). Changes in this coefficient will be used as a measure of drug-induced sedation. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs)Also: Biomarker of nociception (brain)Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Short pulses (50-100 ms) of radiant heat generated by a C02 laser stimulator will be applied to the skin of the left or right hand dorm to briefly and selectively activate heat-sensitive pain receptors. A concomitant EEG recordings will be used to measure the amplitude and latency of the elicited laser-evoked potentials. Changes in LEP amplitude (expressed as percentage of change) will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on the state of the thermonociceptive system. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300)Also: Biomarker of cognitionCognitive auditory-evoked potentials will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Short-lasting auditory tones will be delivered using a three-stimulus oddball paradigm combining standard tones (90% of stimuli), slightly different target tones that the subject must attend and detect (10% of stimuli), and strongly different distractor non-target tones (10% of stimuli). The stimuli will be delivered binaurally using headphones. Participants will be instructed to press a button when they detect a target tone, and to ignore the standard and distractor non-target tones. The EEG recordings will be used to measure the amplitude and latency of the cognitive P3a and P3b potentials (Komerchero \& Polich 1999). Changes in P3a/P3b amplitude will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on cognition (expressed as percentage of change). | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Cervical somatosensory-evoked potentialsAlso: Biomarker of nociception (spinal)Cervical spinal-cord evoked potentials will be recorded before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. The responses will be elicited by transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the median nerve. The N13 component of this response is mediated by large myelinated non-nociceptive fibers and reflects a segmental postsynaptic response of dorsal horn interneurons at the level of lumbar spinal cord (Cruccu et al., 2008). Changes in magnitude of the N13 will be used as a measure of drug-induced effects on spinal cord function (expressed as percentage of change). | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| PupillometryPupillometry measurements will be performed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Pupillometry has been proposed as a method to assess opioid pharmacodynamics. The extent of pupil dilatation can provide an index of nociceptive input via autonomic innervation of the iris muscles, while the extent of the attenuation of this pupillary response during exposure to opioid analgesics could provide an index of pharmacological effects reflecting the extent of opioid receptor occupancy in the CNS. Pupillometry (static pupil diameter, variability of pupil diameter [variation coefficient of pupillary dilation, VCPD, Charier et al. 2017]), light-evoked speed of pupil constriction [maximum pupil constriction velocity, PCV, Connely et al., 2014]) will be measured using a handheld pupillometry device routinely used for clinical evaluations. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Saccadic Peak VelocityThe saccadic peak velocity (SPV; m/s) will be measured before before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Saccadic peak velocity is one of the most sensitive parameters for sedation. Recording of eye movements will be performed in a quiet room with dimmed lightning. Average values of saccadic peak velocity (expressed as degrees/second) of all correct saccades will be measured. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Adaptive tracking testThe test will be performed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. Adaptive tracking is a pursuit-tracking task sensitive to impairment of eye-hand coordination by drugs. It has been proven useful for measuring CNS effects of alcohol, various other psychoactive drugs, and sleep deprivation. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Body Sway TestBody sway will be assessed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment, using a body sway meter and with eyes closed. The body sway meter allows measurement of body movements in a single plane, providing a measure of postural stability. The method has been used to demonstrate effects of sleep deprivation, ethanol and psychoactive drugs. All body movements over a 2-min period are integrated and expressed as millimeters of sway. | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| N-back working memory testWorking memory performance will be assessed before (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment. In this test, a series of letters are shown to the participant on a computer screen. The test includes three conditions with increased working memory load. The "0-back" condition simply requires to indicate whether the presented letter is the letter "X" or another letter. In the "1-back" condition, participants are requested to indicate whether the displayed letter is identical to the preceding letter. In the "2-back" condition, participants are required indicate whether the letter is repeated with one other letter in between (e.g., B … C … B). | Diagnostic test | Patients |
| Patient-reported outcomesBefore (visit 1) and 7-10 after (visit 2) initiating the combination treatment, but also daily between the two visits, 14 days, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after treatment initiation, patient-reported outcomes will be collected to assess clinical effects and side-effects of the combination treatmen These include the short form of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the PROMIS PQ-NEURO score for neuropathic pain, the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS), and the PROMIS Neuro-QOL self-assessment of cognitive functioning. | Other | Patients |
Primary outcome
Correlation between change in magnitude of laser-evoked brain potentials (LEP) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity score
Time frame: three months
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in the magnitude of LEPs (in microvolts) predicts pain relief, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in magnitude of LEPs between Visit 1 and Visit 2 (expressed as percentage of change between the two visits) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in the pain severity score obtained from the BPI (score between 0 and 40; Gjeilo et al., 2007) between Visit 1 and Month 3.
Correlation between change in the alpha attenuation coefficient (AAC) and change in the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS)
Time frame: 10 days
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in AAC (ratio between alpha-band power eyes closed vs. eyes open; Kaida et al., 2006) predicts self-reported sleepiness, the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug combination change in the AAC measured in the resting EEG between Visits 1 and 2 will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported sleepiness assessed using the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS; score between 1 and 7) between Visits 1 and 2.
Correlation between change in magnitude of cognitive P3b potential and change in the PROMIS Neuro-QOL score for cognitive function
Time frame: 10 days
To assess whether inter-individual differences in the drug-induced change in magnitude of the P3b component of auditory-evoked potentials (in microvolts; Komerchero \& Polich 1999) predicts self-reported cognitive dysfunction, the post-drug-combination vs. pre-drug-combination change in P3b magnitude between Visits 1 and 2 (expressed as percentage of change) will be correlated with the post-drug-combination minus pre-drug-combination change in self-reported cognitive dysfunction assessed using the short-form cognitive function measurement of the PROMIS Neuro-QOL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) between Visits 1 and 2 (standardized T score for "cognitive function", having a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in a reference population).
5 secondary outcomes
Correlation between change in magnitude of the N13 spinal-cord evoked potential and change in the PQ-NEURO score for neuropathic pain
Time frame: 10 days
Correlation between change in the variation coefficient of pupillary dilation (VCPD) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score
Time frame: 10 days
Correlation between change in pupil constriction velocity (PCV) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score
Time frame: 10 days
Correlation between change in saccadic peak velocity (SPV) and change in the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS)
Time frame: 10 days
Correlation between change in performance of the 2-back working memory task (2-WM) and change in the PROMIS Neuro-QOL score for cognitive function
Time frame: 10 days
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Feb 2021.
- Background: PubMed 17629665Gjeilo KH, Stenseth R, Wahba A, Lydersen S, Klepstad P. Validation of the brief pain inventory in patients six months after cardiac surgery. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Dec;34(6):648-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.01.010. Epub 2007 Jul 16.
- Background: PubMed 16679057Kaida K, Takahashi M, Akerstedt T, Nakata A, Otsuka Y, Haratani T, Fukasawa K. Validation of the Karolinska sleepiness scale against performance and EEG variables. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Jul;117(7):1574-81. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.03.011. Epub 2006 May 6.
- Background: PubMed 10348317Comerchero MD, Polich J. P3a and P3b from typical auditory and visual stimuli. Clin Neurophysiol. 1999 Jan;110(1):24-30. doi: 10.1016/s0168-5597(98)00033-1.
- Background: PubMed 18486546Cruccu G, Aminoff MJ, Curio G, Guerit JM, Kakigi R, Mauguiere F, Rossini PM, Treede RD, Garcia-Larrea L. Recommendations for the clinical use of somatosensory-evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Aug;119(8):1705-1719. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.03.016. Epub 2008 May 16.
- Background: PubMed 27565279Askew RL, Cook KF, Keefe FJ, Nowinski CJ, Cella D, Revicki DA, Morgan DeWitt EM, Michaud K, Trence DL, Amtmann D. A PROMIS Measure of Neuropathic Pain Quality. Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):623-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.02.009. Epub 2016 Apr 6.
- Background: PubMed 28711635Charier DJ, Zantour D, Pichot V, Chouchou F, Barthelemy JM, Roche F, Molliex SB. Assessing Pain Using the Variation Coefficient of Pupillary Diameter. J Pain. 2017 Nov;18(11):1346-1353. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.06.006. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
- Background: PubMed 25187497Connelly MA, Brown JT, Kearns GL, Anderson RA, St Peter SD, Neville KA. Pupillometry: a non-invasive technique for pain assessment in paediatric patients. Arch Dis Child. 2014 Dec;99(12):1125-31. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2014-306286. Epub 2014 Sep 3.
- Background: PubMed 20383801Haatveit BC, Sundet K, Hugdahl K, Ueland T, Melle I, Andreassen OA. The validity of d prime as a working memory index: results from the "Bergen n-back task". J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010 Oct;32(8):871-80. doi: 10.1080/13803391003596421. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Post-operative Pain
RecruitingPhase 4
ESP Blocks for Posterior Spinal Fusion
Postoperative Pain
Recruiting
Effect of Cryotherapeutic and Nanotherapeutic Sodium Hypochlorite on Post-Operative Endodontic Pain.
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis, Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis
RecruitingPhase 2
REctus Sheath Trial
Acute Pain, Postoperative Pain, Acute
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Pectoral Nerve Block (PECS) Using Magnesium Sulfate Added to Dexamethasone on Quality of Recovery and Chronic Post-Mastectomy Pain
Breast Cancer, Postoperative Pain
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Postoperative Pain in Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section at Assuit University Hospital
Cesarean Section
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.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Scalp electroencephalography (EEG), Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) and Cognitive auditory-evoked potentials (P300) in people with Post-operative Pain, run by Université Catholique de Louvain at 1 site in Belgium.
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 12 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Feb 2021. 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 Belgium. 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. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact André Mouraux, MD, PhD (+32 2 764 54 47, andre.mouraux@uclouvain.be), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Correlation between change in magnitude of laser-evoked brain potentials (LEP) and change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity score (time frame: three months). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04742790, which also lists 8 linked publications.
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 Feb 2021.