lacosamide has been researched along with Fibromyalgia* in 4 studies
3 review(s) available for lacosamide and Fibromyalgia
Article | Year |
---|---|
WITHDRAWN: Anticonvulsants for fibromyalgia.
Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Anticonvulsants (antiepileptic drugs) are drugs frequently used for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes.. To assess the benefits and harms of anticonvulsants for treating FM symptoms.. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 8, 2013), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2013), PsycINFO (1966 to August 2013), SCOPUS (1980 to August 2013) and the reference lists of reviewed articles for published studies and www.clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) for unpublished trials.. We selected randomised controlled trials of any formulation of anticonvulsants used for the treatment of people with FM of any age.. Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed the risks of bias of the studies. We resolved discrepancies by discussion.. We included eight studies: five with pregabalin and one study each with gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam. A total of 2480 people were included into anticonvulsants groups and 1099 people in placebo groups. The median therapy phase of the studies was 13 weeks. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM. The amount and quality of evidence was sufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in FM. Therefore, we focused on our interpretation of the evidence for pregabalin due to our greater certainty about its effects and its greater relevance to clinical practice. All pregabalin studies had a low risk of bias. Reporting a 50% or greater reduction in pain was more frequent with pregabalin use than with a placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33 to 1.90; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12; 95% CI 9 to 21). The number of people who reported being 'much' or 'very much' improved was higher with pregabalin than with placebo (RR 1.38; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.55; NNTB 9; 95% CI 7 to 15). Pregabalin did not substantially reduce fatigue (SMD -0.17; 95% CI -0.25 to -0.09; 2.7% absolute improvement on a 1 to 50 scale) compared with placebo. Pregabalin had a small benefit over placebo in reducing sleep problems by 6.2% fewer points on a scale of 0 to 100 (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.27). The dropout rate due to adverse events was higher with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.07; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 13; 95% CI 9 to 23). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between pregabalin and placebo use (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.49). Dizziness was reported as an adverse event more frequently with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 3.77; 95% CI 3.06 to 4.63; NNTH 4; 95% CI 3 to 5).. The anticonvulsant, pregabalin, demonstrated a small benefit over placebo in reducing pain and sleep problems. Pregabalin use was shown not to substantially reduce fatigue compared with placebo. Study dropout rates due to adverse events were higher with pregabalin use compared with placebo. Dizziness was a particularly frequent adverse event seen with pregabalin use. At the time of writing this review, pregabalin is the only anticonvulsant drug approved for treating FM in the US and in 25 other non-European countries. However, pregabalin has not been approved for treating FM in Europe. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM. Topics: Acetamides; Amines; Anticonvulsants; Conflict of Interest; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Fibromyalgia; Gabapentin; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid; Humans; Lacosamide; Levetiracetam; Piracetam; Pregabalin | 2017 |
Anticonvulsants for fibromyalgia.
Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Anticonvulsants (antiepileptic drugs) are drugs frequently used for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes.. To assess the benefits and harms of anticonvulsants for treating FM symptoms.. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 8, 2013), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2013), PsycINFO (1966 to August 2013), SCOPUS (1980 to August 2013) and the reference lists of reviewed articles for published studies and www.clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) for unpublished trials.. We selected randomised controlled trials of any formulation of anticonvulsants used for the treatment of people with FM of any age.. Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed the risks of bias of the studies. We resolved discrepancies by discussion.. We included eight studies: five with pregabalin and one study each with gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam. A total of 2480 people were included into anticonvulsants groups and 1099 people in placebo groups. The median therapy phase of the studies was 13 weeks. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM. The amount and quality of evidence was sufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in FM. Therefore, we focused on our interpretation of the evidence for pregabalin due to our greater certainty about its effects and its greater relevance to clinical practice. All pregabalin studies had a low risk of bias. Reporting a 50% or greater reduction in pain was more frequent with pregabalin use than with a placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33 to 1.90; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12; 95% CI 9 to 21). The number of people who reported being 'much' or 'very much' improved was higher with pregabalin than with placebo (RR 1.38; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.55; NNTB 9; 95% CI 7 to 15). Pregabalin did not substantially reduce fatigue (SMD -0.17; 95% CI -0.25 to -0.09; 2.7% absolute improvement on a 1 to 50 scale) compared with placebo. Pregabalin had a small benefit over placebo in reducing sleep problems by 6.2% fewer points on a scale of 0 to 100 (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.27). The dropout rate due to adverse events was higher with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.07; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 13; 95% CI 9 to 23). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between pregabalin and placebo use (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.49). Dizziness was reported as an adverse event more frequently with pregabalin use than with placebo use (RR 3.77; 95% CI 3.06 to 4.63; NNTH 4; 95% CI 3 to 5).. The anticonvulsant, pregabalin, demonstrated a small benefit over placebo in reducing pain and sleep problems. Pregabalin use was shown not to substantially reduce fatigue compared with placebo. Study dropout rates due to adverse events were higher with pregabalin use compared with placebo. Dizziness was a particularly frequent adverse event seen with pregabalin use. At the time of writing this review, pregabalin is the only anticonvulsant drug approved for treating FM in the US and in 25 other non-European countries. However, pregabalin has not been approved for treating FM in Europe. The amount and quality of evidence were insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the efficacy and safety of gabapentin, lacosamide and levetiracetam in FM. Topics: Acetamides; Amines; Anticonvulsants; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Fibromyalgia; Gabapentin; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid; Humans; Lacosamide; Levetiracetam; Piracetam; Pregabalin | 2013 |
Lacosamide for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults.
Antiepileptic drugs have been used in pain management since the 1960s; some seem to be especially useful for neuropathic pain. Lacosamide is an antiepileptic drug that has recently been investigated for neuropathic pain relief, although it failed to get approval for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy from either the Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency.. To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of lacosamide in the management of chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia.. We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (2011, Issue 4), CENTRAL (2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (January 2000 to August 2011) and EMBASE (2000 to August 2011) without language restriction, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews.. We included randomised, double-blind studies of eight weeks duration or longer, comparing lacosamide with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia.. Two review authors independently extracted data for efficacy and adverse events and examined issues of study quality, including risk of bias assessments. Where possible, we calculated numbers needed to treat to benefit from dichotomous data for effectiveness, adverse events and study withdrawals.. We included six studies; five (1863 participants) in painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) and one (159 participants) in fibromyalgia. All were placebo-controlled and titrated to a target dose of 200 mg, 400 mg or 600 mg lacosamide daily, given as a divided dose. Study reporting quality was generally good, although the imputation method of last observation carried forward used in analyses of the primary outcomes is known to known to impart major bias where, as here, adverse event withdrawal rates were high. This, together with small numbers of patients and events for most outcomes at most doses meant that most results were of low quality, with moderate quality evidence available for some efficacy outcomes for 400 mg lacosamide.There were too few data for analysis of the 200 mg dose for painful diabetic neuropathy or any dose for fibromyalgia.In painful diabetic neuropathy, lacosamide 400 mg provided statistically increased rates of achievement of "moderate" and "substantial" benefit (at least 30% and at least 50% reduction from baseline in patient-reported pain respectively) and the patient global impression of change outcome of "much or very much improved". In each case the extra proportion benefiting above placebo was about 10%, yielding numbers needed to treat to benefit compared with placebo of 10 to 12. For lacosamide 600 mg there was no consistent benefit over placebo.There was no significant difference between any dose of lacosamide and placebo for participants experiencing any adverse event or a serious adverse event, but adverse event withdrawals showed a significant dose response. The number needed to treat to harm for adverse event withdrawal was 11 for lacosamide 400 mg and 4 for the 600 mg dose.. Lacosamide has limited efficacy in the treatment of peripheral diabetic neuropathy. Higher doses did not give consistently better efficacy, but were associated with significantly more adverse event withdrawals. Where adverse event withdrawals are high with active treatment compared with placebo and when last observation carried forward imputation is used, as in some of these studies, significant overestimation of treatment efficacy can result. It is likely, therefore, that lacosamide is without any useful benefit in treating neuropathic pain; any positive interpretation of the evidence should be made with caution if at all. Topics: Acetamides; Analgesics; Anticonvulsants; Diabetic Neuropathies; Female; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Neuralgia | 2012 |
1 trial(s) available for lacosamide and Fibromyalgia
Article | Year |
---|---|
Efficacy and safety of lacosamide in diabetic neuropathic pain: an 18-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial of fixed-dose regimens.
The aims of this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial were to confirm the efficacy of lacosamide at a daily dose of 400 mg/d and to explore the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lacosamide 200 mg/d and 600 mg/d in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy.. The trial consisted of a 2-week run-in period, a 6-week titration phase, and a 12-week maintenance phase, during which patients received placebo or fixed doses of lacosamide 200, 400, or 600 mg/d. No back titration was allowed during the trial. The primary efficacy criterion was the change in Likert pain score from baseline to the average over the last 4 weeks of the maintenance phase in the intent-to-treat population.. The lacosamide 400 mg/d group demonstrated statistically significant improvement in Likert pain score over placebo for the primary efficacy measure. At the end of treatment, 58% of patients in the lacosamide 400 mg/d treatment group achieved at least a 2-point or 30% reduction in Likert pain score, compared with 46% of placebo-treated patients. The lacosamide 200 mg/d group separated from placebo, but failed to show statistical significance for any of the primary or secondary outcome measures. The lacosamide 600 mg/d group was significantly more efficacious than placebo in the observed cases but not in the intent-to-treat population. This was probably secondary to a relatively high-premature withdrawal rate due to adverse events that occurred during the titration phase in that group. Overall lacosamide at daily doses of 200 to 400 mg was well tolerated, with 8% of patients discontinuing due to an adverse event from the 200 mg/d group and 23% from the 400 mg/d group compared with 9% in the placebo group. Discontinuations due to adverse events were highest in the 600 mg/d group (40%). The most common adverse events consisted of dizziness, nausea, tremor, headache, and fatigue. Somnolence, cognitive and behavioral side effects, weight change, and edema were notably low.. Safety and efficacy analyses indicated that lacosamide 400 mg/d provided an optimal balance between efficacy and side effects in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. Topics: Acetamides; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics; Comorbidity; Diabetic Neuropathies; Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Incidence; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Placebo Effect; Treatment Outcome; United States | 2009 |