Spinal Cord StimulationSCS-OMICSNCT05712980
Transcriptomic Profile of Patients Treated With Different Modalities of Spinal Cord Stimulation
An observational study of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, run by Hospital General Universitario de Valencia at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) is a relatively common condition that can cause a severe disability in patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used in those patients refractory to conventional therapies.In this project the investigators aim to identify new functional molecular basis, defined with transcriptomic… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Spinal Cord Stimulation, Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, Genetic Change
- What is being tested?
- Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalities
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- Feb 2023to Sep 2025
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 65 years
- All sexes
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Adult patients affected by FBSS fullfilling all the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria will be included. Following our usual protocol, all patients will attend a session with our psychologist to consider the adequacy of the treatment to be used and to determine the effect of psychosocial issues on their pain complaints. A negative evaluation will be considered a key exclusion criterion. Patients will be instructed to keep their medication dosage stable throughout the study. All the subjects of study will be implanted with the same device from Medtronic. The device will be programmed with two different strategies, the conventional one and the Differential Targeted Multiplexed (DTM) programming.
Who may be able to join
- Adult patients affected by FBSS, defined as "surgical end stage after one or several interventions on the lumbar neuroaxis indicated to relief lower back pain, root pain or the combination of both, without effect"
- Age between 18 and 65 years
- Severe pain measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS > 6/10), more than six months of evolution
- Refractory pain despite having carried out pharmacological treatment according to WHO's stratified approach; physical/rehabilitation therapy and/or interventional procedures (e.g. epidural steroid injections, radiofrequency, epiduroscopy/adhesiolysis)
Who cannot join
- Patients with severe associated comorbidities (e.g. severe high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vasculopathy, severe heart disease, etc...) that may in themselves cause pain or aggravate the existence of previous pain.
- Extensive osteosynthesis encompassing the thoraco-lumbar region where the tips of the electrodes are routinely positioned.
- Abnormal pain behavior, unresolved psychiatric illness, unresolved issues of secondary gain or inappropriate medication use
- Patients not consenting or refusing to participate will be excluded
- Negative evaluation of the psychologist previous to the implant
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Consorcio Hospital General Universitario
Valencia, 46014
Gustavo Fabregat, MD, PhD, +34963131800
Gustavo Fabregat, MD, PhD
About this study
Official title: Identification of Differentially Expressed Genes in RNAseq Data of Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Treated With Different Modalities of Spinal Cord Stimulation: Looking for Biomarkers of Response and Effectiveness
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) is a relatively common condition that can cause a severe disability in patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used in those patients refractory to conventional therapies.In this project the investigators aim to identify new functional molecular basis, defined with transcriptomic profiling, differentially represented in the serum of patients suffering chronic pain caused by FBSS.
The investigators will try to Identify "omics" markers for diagnosing and monitoring the process of development and maintenance of pain as well as the evaluation of these as evolutionary disease markers or predictors of the response to SCS therapy. To carry out the project, 40 patients diagnosed with refractory FBSS and treated with an SCS system for pain management will be included. Blood samples will be obtained to analyze the transcription profiling in plasma of patients responding to different modalities of SCS therapy.
Read the detailed description
Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a real challenge for the specialist because of its clinical complexity and economic importance not only in the cost of treatment but because of the high incidence of the syndrome in patients of working age and with normal life expectancy. This syndrome is a complication of lumbosacral surgery with an incidence ranging from 5-40%.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used in the treatment of patients with FBSS for years safely and effectively . Although it was initially believed that the main mechanism of action was explained by the "Gate Control Theory" described by Wall and Melzack in 1965, it should be noted that other mechanisms beyond this could contribute to pain relief resulting from SCS. These include inhibition of neuronal excitability and hypersensitivity at the medullary level as well as changes in the release of neurotransmitters like GABA, acetylcholine, adenosine, serotonin and norepinephrine, involved in the transmission and modulation of pain. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effect of SCS remain unknown.
Genetic studies are used to provide new insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the onset and maintenance of pain. These can be driven by the hypothesis, thus evaluating the expression of default molecules, or independent of the hypothesis, exploring gene expression at the gene level at the whole genome. Microarray chips measure the expression of hundreds of genes in a given sample. Used to study a wide variety of biological systems, they have been used to evaluate extensive changes at the transcriptional level in different parts of the central or peripheral nervous system, leading to the discovery of new pain-related genes such as the Kv9.1 subunit of the potassium channel or KCNS1.
Recently, some animal model studies suggest that SCS produces extensive changes in gene expression. Tilley and collaborators found that SCS produced modulation in the expression of 5HTra, cFOS and GABAbr1 among others, with a strong correlation between the amount of current applied and the expression of GABAbr1, Na/K ATPase (negative correlation), 5HT3r and VIP (positive correlation) at the medular level and also at the level of the dorsal root ganglion. These authors focused on analyzing groups of genes that were shown altered in animal models of peripheral nerve injury. Stephens and collaborators performed an RNA seq of the spinal cord of rats with neuropathic pain secondary to the sciatic nerve ligation to which a spinal cord stimulator was implanted and found that gene expression changed after the application of SCS. They identified that the expression of some key genes in the expression of protein dense post-synaptic supporting proteins network in glutamaergic synapses is downregulated after SCS; this could destabilize this dense network, thus decreasing the effectiveness of synaptic signaling. They also found that SCS could activate nearby spinal tracts that affect neurons and gloss cells in the distal spinal segments. Vallejo and Tilley's group also performed extensive transcriptome analysis in animal models of neuropathic pain and found that SCS produces significant modulation in gene expression at the spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion level, with groups of genes and metabolic pathways similar in both tissues and which are directly or indirectly related to neural regeneration, regulation of inflammatory and immune responses and regulation of ion transport. Our group analyzed the gene expression of different markers (from cannabinoid receptors, opioid receptors and opioid peptides) using real-time polymerase chain reaction from lymphocyte RNA obtained from peripheral blood samples of patients with FBSS treated with SCS, observing a significant increase in proenkephalin (PNK) following SCS with respect to baseline levels and maintained over time.
Using the advantages of large-scale study of the genome using microarrays, we have carried out a research project in recent years with the main objective of identifying new molecular bases, defined with transcriptomic profiles, differentially expressed in the plasma of patients affected by FBSS and treated with tonic or conventional SCS. This study has been funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III through the Project PI16/01364 (Co-funded by European Regional Development Fund/European Social Fund "A way to make Europe"/"Investing in your future"). The project was approved by the Ethical Committee for Clinical Research of the University General Hospital of Valencia. The study complied with local regulations, Good Clinical Practice guidelines, and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, as well as with current legislation and regulations governing protection of personal data and the rights and responsibilities regarding information and documentation in health care. Our group performed a transcriptomic analysis of the blood of patients affected of FBSS and treated with SCS (responder patients); we obtained samples before and at different times after implantation of the system in order to find differential gene expression in response to treatment and that could serve as potential biomarkers of effectiveness to therapy. We also performed transcriptomic analysis of patients in which SCS was not effective (non-responders), comparing the results with the responding patients with the intention of finding differential expression of potential biomarkers of response to SCS therapy. Finally, we compared the expression of patients diagnosed with FBSS with a group of spine-intervened patients who did not develop pain and served as a control group; we try to find differences in the gene expression between the two populations with the aim of finding possible biomarkers of disease development. We included 30 patients with SCS-treated FBSS (of whom 7 were non-responders and 23 responders) and 15 control patients. We have completed the recruitment and analysis of the samples periods and we are currently in the interpretation phase of the final results and development of the corresponding publications. Although the results are not definitive, preliminary analysis shows that there are more than 190 differentially expressed genes (p < 0.05) at baseline when comparing control patients and patients with FBSS treated with SCS. We also found more than 750 genes differentially expressed in patients implanted before and after the onset of SCS therapy.
HYPOTHESIS
The biochemical and molecular processes associated with FBSS are unknown as are the changes that occur in patients undergoing SCS. The transcriptomic analysis seem promising tools to provide insight on the mechanisms underlying chronic pain. Quantification of RNA with RT-PCR will allow to identify differential genes implicated and solid conclusions to be drawn.
Our hypothesis is based on the fact that different genetic expression must occur in clinical situations related to pain and that these alterations should be differentially modified in patients successfully treated with spinal cord stimulation.
The identification of these possible biomarkers of state or evolution of the pathology and its treatment will contribute significantly to establish more accurate therapeutic strategies and can serve as predictive biomarkers of response to treatment, guiding the selection of therapeutic targets for the development of future treatment strategies.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
Based on these hypotheses and with the hopeful results previously obtained by our group, the investigators aim to compare whether the DTM programming of the SCS system produces a different expression-level effect than conventional programming with the intention of seeking biomarkers of response and evolution to this programming modality.
The investigators also aim to study whether these differences could be in relation to significantly different clinical outcomes and correlate with the intensity of the effect of the different modalities.
- Being tested
- Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalities
- Keywords
- pain, spinal cord stimulation, RNAseq, DTM, transcriptomics, omics, failed back surgery syndrome
- Medical subject headings
- Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalitiesDevice
Surgical technique
Patients recruited will be scheduled for the implantation of the SCS system in two phases. The implant procedure will be performed following our standardized clinical practice under local anesthesia and moderate sedation.
Clinical parameters
Clinical evaluation of study subjects shall include, in addition to demographic parameters, the assessment of parameters related to pain experience, disability, quality of life, as well as other psychological variables. All these parameters will be evaluated at different times of the study.
Sample processing
10 ml of peripheral blood will be obtained per venopuncture at different moments, always at the same time of day and in the same anatomical location.
Expression arrays
After a manual removal of RNA the expression arrays and the scanning of the crystals will be carried out after hybridization
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| DTM Cohort | Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation with DTM programming Receives: Device: Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalities | |
| Conventional Cohort | Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation with conventional programming Receives: Device: Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalities |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Transcriptomic profile change in DTM responders
Identify the transcriptomic signature of responding patients undergoing DTM programming of the SCS system and analyze potential changes over time
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Secondary outcomes (5)
DTM vs Conventional signatures
Compare whether the DTM programming of the SCS system produces a different expression-level effect than conventional programming
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Transcriptomic Profile vs Clinical Outcomes
Analyze potential correlations between the transcriptomic profiles measured wiht RNAseq techniques with clinical measurements (Intensity of pain measured with Numeric Rating Scale and level of disability measured with Oswestry Scale
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Intensity of pain
Measure the intensity of pain with a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in different moments before and after the treatment with SCS
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
QOL
Measure the quality of life of patients with FBSS who undergo treatment with a spinal cord stimulation system with the SF12 questionnaire in different moments before and after the treatment with SCS
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Level of disability
Measure the Level of disability of patients with FBSS who undergo treatment with a spinal cord stimulation system with the Oswestry Score in different moments before and after the treatment with SCS
Measured: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Feb 2023
- Study startFeb 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completionFeb 2025 (estimated)
- Study completionSep 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (32)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Spinal Cord StimulationStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital General Universitario de Valencia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gustavo Fabregat, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia
- Investigators
- Gustavo Fabregat, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Consultant of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Department
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05712980
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SCS - OMICS
- Acronym
- SCS-OMICS
- Status last verified
- Jan 2023
- First submitted
- 17 Jan 2023
- Last updated
- 6 Feb 2023
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Gybels J, Erdine S, Maeyaert J, Meyerson B, Winkelmuller W, Augustinsson L, Bonezzi C, Brasseur L, DeJongste M, Kupers R, Marchettini P, Muller-Schwefe G, Nitescu P, Plaghki L, Reig E, Spincemaille G, Thomson S, Tronnier V, Van Buyten JP. Neuromodulation of pain. A consensus statement prepared in Brussels 16-18 January 1998 by the following task force of the European Federation of IASP Chapters (EFIC). Eur J Pain. 1998;2(3):203-9. doi: 10.1016/s1090-3801(98)90016-7. No abstract available.
PubMed 15102380Gonzalez Viejo MA, Condon Huerta MJ. [Disability from low back pain in Spain]. Med Clin (Barc). 2000 Apr 8;114(13):491-2. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7753(00)71342-x. Spanish.
PubMed 10846653Turner JA, Loeser JD, Deyo RA, Sanders SB. Spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome or complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review of effectiveness and complications. Pain. 2004 Mar;108(1-2):137-47. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.12.016.
PubMed 15109517Van Buyten JP. Neurostimulation for chronic neuropathic back pain in failed back surgery syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006 Apr;31(4 Suppl):S25-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.12.012.
PubMed 16647592Inoue S, Kamiya M, Nishihara M, Arai YP, Ikemoto T, Ushida T. Prevalence, characteristics, and burden of failed back surgery syndrome: the influence of various residual symptoms on patient satisfaction and quality of life as assessed by a nationwide Internet survey in Japan. J Pain Res. 2017 Apr 6;10:811-823. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S129295. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 28435318Taylor RS, Taylor RJ. The economic impact of failed back surgery syndrome. Br J Pain. 2012 Nov;6(4):174-81. doi: 10.1177/2049463712470887.
PubMed 26516490Chan CW, Peng P. Failed back surgery syndrome. Pain Med. 2011 Apr;12(4):577-606. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01089.x. Epub 2011 Apr 4.
PubMed 21463472North RB, Wetzel FT. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain of spinal origin: a valuable long-term solution. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Nov 15;27(22):2584-91; discussion 2592. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00035.
PubMed 12435997Kumar K, Taylor RS, Jacques L, Eldabe S, Meglio M, Molet J, Thomson S, O'Callaghan J, Eisenberg E, Milbouw G, Buchser E, Fortini G, Richardson J, North RB. Spinal cord stimulation versus conventional medical management for neuropathic pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. Pain. 2007 Nov;132(1-2):179-88. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.07.028. Epub 2007 Sep 12.
PubMed 17845835Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965 Nov 19;150(3699):971-9. doi: 10.1126/science.150.3699.971. No abstract available.
PubMed 5320816Zhang TC, Janik JJ, Grill WM. Mechanisms and models of spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Brain Res. 2014 Jun 20;1569:19-31. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.04.039. Epub 2014 May 4.
PubMed 24802658Zhang TC, Janik JJ, Peters RV, Chen G, Ji RR, Grill WM. Spinal sensory projection neuron responses to spinal cord stimulation are mediated by circuits beyond gate control. J Neurophysiol. 2015 Jul;114(1):284-300. doi: 10.1152/jn.00147.2015. Epub 2015 May 13.
PubMed 25972582Linderoth B, Foreman RD. Conventional and Novel Spinal Stimulation Algorithms: Hypothetical Mechanisms of Action and Comments on Outcomes. Neuromodulation. 2017 Aug;20(6):525-533. doi: 10.1111/ner.12624. Epub 2017 May 31.
PubMed 28568898Guan Y, Wacnik PW, Yang F, Carteret AF, Chung CY, Meyer RA, Raja SN. Spinal cord stimulation-induced analgesia: electrical stimulation of dorsal column and dorsal roots attenuates dorsal horn neuronal excitability in neuropathic rats. Anesthesiology. 2010 Dec;113(6):1392-405. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181fcd95c.
PubMed 21068658Shechter R, Yang F, Xu Q, Cheong YK, He SQ, Sdrulla A, Carteret AF, Wacnik PW, Dong X, Meyer RA, Raja SN, Guan Y. Conventional and kilohertz-frequency spinal cord stimulation produces intensity- and frequency-dependent inhibition of mechanical hypersensitivity in a rat model of neuropathic pain. Anesthesiology. 2013 Aug;119(2):422-32. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31829bd9e2.
PubMed 23880991
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Feb 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Identification of Differentially Expressed Genes in RNAseq Data of Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Treated With Different Modalities of Spinal Cord Stimulation: Looking for Biomarkers of Response and Effectiveness
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05712980
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SCS-OMICS / SCS - OMICS
- Keywords
- pain, spinal cord stimulation, RNAseq, DTM, transcriptomics, omics, failed back surgery syndrome
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital General Universitario de ValenciaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Feb 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Feb 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Sep 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Feb 2023 (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.
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) is a relatively common condition that can cause a severe disability in patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used in those patients refractory to conventional therapies.In this project the investigators aim to identify new functional molecular basis, defined with transcriptomic profiling, differentially represented in the serum of patients suffering chronic pain caused by FBSS.
The investigators will try to Identify "omics" markers for diagnosing and monitoring the process of development and maintenance of pain as well as the evaluation of these as evolutionary disease markers or predictors of the response to SCS therapy. To carry out the project, 40 patients diagnosed with refractory FBSS and treated with an SCS system for pain management will be included. Blood samples will be obtained to analyze the transcription profiling in plasma of patients responding to different modalities of SCS therapy.
Detailed description
Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a real challenge for the specialist because of its clinical complexity and economic importance not only in the cost of treatment but because of the high incidence of the syndrome in patients of working age and with normal life expectancy. This syndrome is a complication of lumbosacral surgery with an incidence ranging from 5-40%.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used in the treatment of patients with FBSS for years safely and effectively . Although it was initially believed that the main mechanism of action was explained by the "Gate Control Theory" described by Wall and Melzack in 1965, it should be noted that other mechanisms beyond this could contribute to pain relief resulting from SCS. These include inhibition of neuronal excitability and hypersensitivity at the medullary level as well as changes in the release of neurotransmitters like GABA, acetylcholine, adenosine, serotonin and norepinephrine, involved in the transmission and modulation of pain. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effect of SCS remain unknown.
Genetic studies are used to provide new insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the onset and maintenance of pain. These can be driven by the hypothesis, thus evaluating the expression of default molecules, or independent of the hypothesis, exploring gene expression at the gene level at the whole genome. Microarray chips measure the expression of hundreds of genes in a given sample. Used to study a wide variety of biological systems, they have been used to evaluate extensive changes at the transcriptional level in different parts of the central or peripheral nervous system, leading to the discovery of new pain-related genes such as the Kv9.1 subunit of the potassium channel or KCNS1.
Recently, some animal model studies suggest that SCS produces extensive changes in gene expression. Tilley and collaborators found that SCS produced modulation in the expression of 5HTra, cFOS and GABAbr1 among others, with a strong correlation between the amount of current applied and the expression of GABAbr1, Na/K ATPase (negative correlation), 5HT3r and VIP (positive correlation) at the medular level and also at the level of the dorsal root ganglion. These authors focused on analyzing groups of genes that were shown altered in animal models of peripheral nerve injury. Stephens and collaborators performed an RNA seq of the spinal cord of rats with neuropathic pain secondary to the sciatic nerve ligation to which a spinal cord stimulator was implanted and found that gene expression changed after the application of SCS. They identified that the expression of some key genes in the expression of protein dense post-synaptic supporting proteins network in glutamaergic synapses is downregulated after SCS; this could destabilize this dense network, thus decreasing the effectiveness of synaptic signaling. They also found that SCS could activate nearby spinal tracts that affect neurons and gloss cells in the distal spinal segments. Vallejo and Tilley's group also performed extensive transcriptome analysis in animal models of neuropathic pain and found that SCS produces significant modulation in gene expression at the spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion level, with groups of genes and metabolic pathways similar in both tissues and which are directly or indirectly related to neural regeneration, regulation of inflammatory and immune responses and regulation of ion transport. Our group analyzed the gene expression of different markers (from cannabinoid receptors, opioid receptors and opioid peptides) using real-time polymerase chain reaction from lymphocyte RNA obtained from peripheral blood samples of patients with FBSS treated with SCS, observing a significant increase in proenkephalin (PNK) following SCS with respect to baseline levels and maintained over time.
Using the advantages of large-scale study of the genome using microarrays, we have carried out a research project in recent years with the main objective of identifying new molecular bases, defined with transcriptomic profiles, differentially expressed in the plasma of patients affected by FBSS and treated with tonic or conventional SCS. This study has been funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III through the Project PI16/01364 (Co-funded by European Regional Development Fund/European Social Fund "A way to make Europe"/"Investing in your future"). The project was approved by the Ethical Committee for Clinical Research of the University General Hospital of Valencia. The study complied with local regulations, Good Clinical Practice guidelines, and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, as well as with current legislation and regulations governing protection of personal data and the rights and responsibilities regarding information and documentation in health care. Our group performed a transcriptomic analysis of the blood of patients affected of FBSS and treated with SCS (responder patients); we obtained samples before and at different times after implantation of the system in order to find differential gene expression in response to treatment and that could serve as potential biomarkers of effectiveness to therapy. We also performed transcriptomic analysis of patients in which SCS was not effective (non-responders), comparing the results with the responding patients with the intention of finding differential expression of potential biomarkers of response to SCS therapy. Finally, we compared the expression of patients diagnosed with FBSS with a group of spine-intervened patients who did not develop pain and served as a control group; we try to find differences in the gene expression between the two populations with the aim of finding possible biomarkers of disease development. We included 30 patients with SCS-treated FBSS (of whom 7 were non-responders and 23 responders) and 15 control patients. We have completed the recruitment and analysis of the samples periods and we are currently in the interpretation phase of the final results and development of the corresponding publications. Although the results are not definitive, preliminary analysis shows that there are more than 190 differentially expressed genes (p < 0.05) at baseline when comparing control patients and patients with FBSS treated with SCS. We also found more than 750 genes differentially expressed in patients implanted before and after the onset of SCS therapy.
HYPOTHESIS
The biochemical and molecular processes associated with FBSS are unknown as are the changes that occur in patients undergoing SCS. The transcriptomic analysis seem promising tools to provide insight on the mechanisms underlying chronic pain. Quantification of RNA with RT-PCR will allow to identify differential genes implicated and solid conclusions to be drawn.
Our hypothesis is based on the fact that different genetic expression must occur in clinical situations related to pain and that these alterations should be differentially modified in patients successfully treated with spinal cord stimulation.
The identification of these possible biomarkers of state or evolution of the pathology and its treatment will contribute significantly to establish more accurate therapeutic strategies and can serve as predictive biomarkers of response to treatment, guiding the selection of therapeutic targets for the development of future treatment strategies.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
Based on these hypotheses and with the hopeful results previously obtained by our group, the investigators aim to compare whether the DTM programming of the SCS system produces a different expression-level effect than conventional programming with the intention of seeking biomarkers of response and evolution to this programming modality.
The investigators also aim to study whether these differences could be in relation to significantly different clinical outcomes and correlate with the intensity of the effect of the different modalities.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| DTM Cohort | – | Device: Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalitiesPatients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation with DTM programming |
| Conventional Cohort | – | Device: Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalitiesPatients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation with conventional programming |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Adult patients affected by FBSS fullfilling all the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria will be included. Following our usual protocol, all patients will attend a session with our psychologist to consider the adequacy of the treatment to be used and to determine the effect of psychosocial issues on their pain complaints. A negative evaluation will be considered a key exclusion criterion. Patients will be instructed to keep their medication dosage stable throughout the study. All the subjects of study will be implanted with the same device from Medtronic. The device will be programmed with two different strategies, the conventional one and the Differential Targeted Multiplexed (DTM) programming.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Adult patients affected by FBSS, defined as "surgical end stage after one or several interventions on the lumbar neuroaxis indicated to relief lower back pain, root pain or the combination of both, without effect"
- Age between 18 and 65 years
- Severe pain measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS > 6/10), more than six months of evolution
- Refractory pain despite having carried out pharmacological treatment according to WHO's stratified approach; physical/rehabilitation therapy and/or interventional procedures (e.g. epidural steroid injections, radiofrequency, epiduroscopy/adhesiolysis)
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients with severe associated comorbidities (e.g. severe high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vasculopathy, severe heart disease, etc...) that may in themselves cause pain or aggravate the existence of previous pain.
- Extensive osteosynthesis encompassing the thoraco-lumbar region where the tips of the electrodes are routinely positioned.
- Abnormal pain behavior, unresolved psychiatric illness, unresolved issues of secondary gain or inappropriate medication use
- Patients not consenting or refusing to participate will be excluded
- Negative evaluation of the psychologist previous to the implant
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Implanted pulse generator for SCS with different programming modalitiesSurgical technique Patients recruited will be scheduled for the implantation of the SCS system in two phases. The implant procedure will be performed following our standardized clinical practice under local anesthesia and moderate sedation. Clinical parameters Clinical evaluation of study subjects shall include, in addition to demographic parameters, the assessment of parameters related to pain experience, disability, quality of life, as well as other psychological variables. All these parameters will be evaluated at different times of the study. Sample processing 10 ml of peripheral blood will be obtained per venopuncture at different moments, always at the same time of day and in the same anatomical location. Expression arrays After a manual removal of RNA the expression arrays and the scanning of the crystals will be carried out after hybridization | Device | Conventional Cohort, DTM Cohort |
Primary outcome
Transcriptomic profile change in DTM responders
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Identify the transcriptomic signature of responding patients undergoing DTM programming of the SCS system and analyze potential changes over time
5 secondary outcomes
DTM vs Conventional signatures
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Transcriptomic Profile vs Clinical Outcomes
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Intensity of pain
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
QOL
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Level of disability
Time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Feb 2023.
- Background: PubMed 15102380Gybels J, Erdine S, Maeyaert J, Meyerson B, Winkelmuller W, Augustinsson L, Bonezzi C, Brasseur L, DeJongste M, Kupers R, Marchettini P, Muller-Schwefe G, Nitescu P, Plaghki L, Reig E, Spincemaille G, Thomson S, Tronnier V, Van Buyten JP. Neuromodulation of pain. A consensus statement prepared in Brussels 16-18 January 1998 by the following task force of the European Federation of IASP Chapters (EFIC). Eur J Pain. 1998;2(3):203-9. doi: 10.1016/s1090-3801(98)90016-7. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 10846653Gonzalez Viejo MA, Condon Huerta MJ. [Disability from low back pain in Spain]. Med Clin (Barc). 2000 Apr 8;114(13):491-2. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7753(00)71342-x. Spanish.
- Background: PubMed 15109517Turner JA, Loeser JD, Deyo RA, Sanders SB. Spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome or complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review of effectiveness and complications. Pain. 2004 Mar;108(1-2):137-47. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.12.016.
- Background: PubMed 16647592Van Buyten JP. Neurostimulation for chronic neuropathic back pain in failed back surgery syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006 Apr;31(4 Suppl):S25-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.12.012.
- Background: PubMed 28435318Inoue S, Kamiya M, Nishihara M, Arai YP, Ikemoto T, Ushida T. Prevalence, characteristics, and burden of failed back surgery syndrome: the influence of various residual symptoms on patient satisfaction and quality of life as assessed by a nationwide Internet survey in Japan. J Pain Res. 2017 Apr 6;10:811-823. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S129295. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 26516490Taylor RS, Taylor RJ. The economic impact of failed back surgery syndrome. Br J Pain. 2012 Nov;6(4):174-81. doi: 10.1177/2049463712470887.
- Background: PubMed 21463472Chan CW, Peng P. Failed back surgery syndrome. Pain Med. 2011 Apr;12(4):577-606. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01089.x. Epub 2011 Apr 4.
- Background: PubMed 12435997North RB, Wetzel FT. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain of spinal origin: a valuable long-term solution. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Nov 15;27(22):2584-91; discussion 2592. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00035.
- Background: PubMed 17845835Kumar K, Taylor RS, Jacques L, Eldabe S, Meglio M, Molet J, Thomson S, O'Callaghan J, Eisenberg E, Milbouw G, Buchser E, Fortini G, Richardson J, North RB. Spinal cord stimulation versus conventional medical management for neuropathic pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. Pain. 2007 Nov;132(1-2):179-88. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.07.028. Epub 2007 Sep 12.
- Background: PubMed 5320816Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965 Nov 19;150(3699):971-9. doi: 10.1126/science.150.3699.971. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 24802658Zhang TC, Janik JJ, Grill WM. Mechanisms and models of spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Brain Res. 2014 Jun 20;1569:19-31. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.04.039. Epub 2014 May 4.
- Background: PubMed 25972582Zhang TC, Janik JJ, Peters RV, Chen G, Ji RR, Grill WM. Spinal sensory projection neuron responses to spinal cord stimulation are mediated by circuits beyond gate control. J Neurophysiol. 2015 Jul;114(1):284-300. doi: 10.1152/jn.00147.2015. Epub 2015 May 13.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Spinal Cord Stimulation
Recruiting
Adaptive Recruitment Curve Analysis Using Bayesian Modeling
Modeling of Recruitment Curves
Recruiting
Transcutaneous Spinal Stimulation for Children and Youth With Spina Bifida
Myelomeningocele, Spina Bifida
Recruiting
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation Combined With 4-Aminopyridine and Intensive Rehabilitation in SCI
Spinal Cord Injuries
Active, not recruiting
Effects of Whole-body Electrical Muscle Stimulation Exercise on Adults With Neuromuscular Disease
Neuromuscular Diseases (NMD), Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
RecruitingObservational study
Post Market Evaluation of Real World Outcomes and Durability to Support Implantable Inceptiv™ Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy
Chronic Pain, Intractable Pain
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.
Gustavo Fabregat, MD, PhD principal investigator
Consultant of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Department
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, run by Hospital General Universitario de Valencia at 1 site in Spain.
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 4 inclusion and 5 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 6 Feb 2023. 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 Spain. 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 Gustavo Fabregat, MD, PhD (+34963131800, gfabregat@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Transcriptomic profile change in DTM responders (time frame: T0: Before IPG; T1: 15 days after IPG and T2 2 months after IPG). 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 NCT05712980, which also lists 32 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 6 Feb 2023.