Levels of gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase in cultured skin fibroblasts from cystinotics and normals.

B. States,S. Segal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3205(80)90419-1

1980-11-24

Life Science

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Alprazolam for essential tremor

Elisa Bruno,Alessandra Nicoletti,Graziella Quattrocchi,Graziella Filippini,Mario Zappia,Carlo Colosimo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009681.pub2

2015-12-06

Abstract:Background: Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. Treatment is based primarily on pharmacological agents. On this basis, although primidone and propranolol are well-established treatments in clinical practice, they could be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients and can produce serious adverse events (AEs) in a large percentage of individuals. For these reasons, evaluating treatment alternatives for ET may be a worthwhile pursuit. Alprazolam has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for treatment of individuals with ET, but its efficacy and safety are uncertain. Objectives: PrimaryTo assess the efficacy and safety of alprazolam in the treatment of individuals with ET. SecondaryTo examine effects of alprazolam treatment on the quality of life of people with ET. Search methods: We carried out a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2015), EMBASE (January 1988 to September 2015), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (1999 to September 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (1997 to September 2015) and the World Health Organiza tion (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (2004 to September 2015). We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews. Selection criteria: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of alprazolam versus placebo or any other treatment. We included studies in which ET was diagnosed according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies that included patients presenting with secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters for the pur p ose of assessing outcomes. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed risk of bias and the body of evidence. We used inverse variance methods for continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared differences between treatment groups as mean differences. We used Review Manager software for management and analysis of data. Main results: We included in this review one trial that compared alprazolam versus placebo (24 participants). It was judged to have high overall risk of bias. We graded the overall quality of evidence as very low. Compared with those given placebo, participants treated with alprazolam showed a significant reduction in tremor severity (mean difference (MD) -0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.83 to -0.67). Nine alprazolam-treated participants (75%) developed AEs, mainly represented by sedation (50%), constipation (17%) and dry mouth (9%). No participants in the alprazolam group and no p articipants in the placebo group discontinued treatment and dropped out of the study. Authors' conclusions: Currently available data reveal evidence insufficient for assessment of the efficacy and safety of alprazolam treatment for individuals with ET.
Pregabalin add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

Mariangela Panebianco,Rebecca Bresnahan,Anthony G Marson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005612.pub5

IF: 8.4

2022-03-31

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review last published in Issue 7, 2019; it includes two additional studies. Epilepsy is a common neurological disease that affects approximately 1% of the UK population. Approximately one‐third of these people continue to have seizures despite drug treatment. Pregabalin is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs that has been developed to improve outcomes. In this review we summarised the current evidence regarding pregabalin when used as an add‐on treatment for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin when used as an add‐on treatment for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. For the latest update we searched the following databases on 16 November 2020: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 16 November 2020). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi‐randomised, controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy. We imposed no language restrictions. We contacted the manufacturers of pregabalin and authors in the field to identify any relevant unpublished studies. We included randomised controlled trials comparing pregabalin with placebo or an alternative antiepileptic drug as an add‐on for people of any age with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. Double‐blind and single‐blind trials were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; secondary outcomes were seizure freedom, treatment withdrawal for any reason, treatment withdrawal due to adverse effects, and proportion of individuals experiencing adverse effects. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. Primary analyses were intention‐to‐treat (ITT). We presented summary risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We evaluated dose response in regression models. We carried out a risk of bias assessment for each included study using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and assessed the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We included 11 randomised controlled trials (3949 participants). Nine trials compared pregabalin to placebo. For the primary outcome, participants randomised to pregabalin were significantly more likely to attain a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.72, 9 trials, 2663 participants, low‐certainty evidence). The odds of response doubled with an increase in dose from 300 mg/day to 600 mg/day (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.74 to 2.28), indicating a dose‐response relationship. Pregabalin was significantly associated with seizure freedom (RR 3.94, 95% CI 1.50 to 10.37, 4 trials, 1125 participants, moderate‐certainty evidence). Participants were significantly more likely to withdraw from pregabalin treatment than placebo for any reason (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.60; 9 trials, 2663 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence) and for adverse effects (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.64; 9 trials, 2663 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Three trials compared pregabalin to three active‐control drugs: lamotrigine, eventrate and gabapentin. Participants allocated to pregabalin were significantly more likely to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency than those allocated to lamotrigine (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.12; 1 trial, 293 participants) but not those allocated to eventrate (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.11; 1 trial, 509 participants) or gabapentin (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12; 1 trial, 484 participants). We found no significant differences between pregabalin and lamotrigine for seizure freedom (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.83). However, significantly fewer participants achieved seizure freedom with add‐on pregabalin compared to eventrate (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.85). No data were reported for this outcome for pregabalin versus gabapentin. We detected no significant differences in treatment withdrawal rate for any reason or due to adverse effects, specifically, during either pooled analysis or subgroup analysis. Ataxia, dizziness, somnolence, weight gain, headache and fatigue were significantly associated with pregabalin than in active control. We rated the overall risk of bias in the included studies as low or unclear due to the possibility of publication bias and lack of methodological details provided. We assessed all the studies to be at a high risk of funding bias as they were all sponsored by Pfizer. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low to moderate using the GRADE approach. For people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy, pregabalin when used as an add‐on treatment was significantly more effective than placebo at producing a 50% or greater seizu -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin for Postherpetic Neuralgia in A Population of Chinese Patients

Quanzhong Liu,Haibo Chen,Liyan Xi,Zhen Hong,Li He,Yi Fu,Hong Fang,Ningxiu Shang,Ping Yan,Dongsheng Fan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12413

IF: 3.079

2015-01-01

Pain Practice

Abstract:Background and purposeCurrently, there are limited options for treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) patients in China. While pregabalin is an effective treatment option for PHN in several countries, there is limited information on its efficacy in Chinese patients.MethodsThis was an 8-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Chinese patients with PHN randomized (1:1) to pregabalin 300 mg/day or placebo. Primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in mean pain score (Daily Pain Rating Scale; 0 = no pain' to 10 = worst possible pain'). Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in overall pain intensity score, by visual analog scale (VAS; 0 = no pain' to 100 = worst possible pain') and daily sleep interference score (0 = pain does not interfere with sleep' to 10 = completely interferes').ResultsA total of 220 patients were randomized and received treatment (111 pregabalin and 109 placebo). Improvement in mean pain score with pregabalin was significantly greater than placebo, least squares mean difference (95% CI), -0.71 (-1.08, -0.34); P = 0.0002. Improvements in VAS and sleep interference score at endpoint were significantly greater with pregabalin than placebo, least squares mean difference (95% CI), -8.18 (-11.99, -4.37); P < 0.0001, and -0.54 (-0.93, -0.14); P = 0.0079, respectively. Adverse events were consistent with current product labeling, with dizziness the most commonly reported adverse event (24.3% of pregabalin-treated patients).ConclusionPregabalin improved measures of pain and sleep, and is well tolerated in Chinese patients with PHN. These results may inform physicians treating patients with PHN in China.
Randomised clinical trial: the effects of pregabalin vs placebo on functional dyspepsia

Isariyaphong Kotikula,Nithi Thinrungroj,Kanokwan Pinyopornpanish,Phuripong Kijdamrongthum,Apinya Leerapun,Taned Chitapanarux,Satawat Thongsawat,Ong‐Ard Praisontarangkul

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16588

2021-08-30

Abstract:BackgroundCurrently, central neuromodulators are among the therapeutic options for the treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD). Pregabalin, a gabapentinoid, is a neuromodulator that could potentially improve visceral hypersensitivity in FD patients. AimTo assess the efficacy and safety of pregabalin for the treatment of FD MethodsWe performed a randomised placebo-controlled study including FD patients who did not respond to proton pump inhibitors. Patients were randomly assigned to receive pregabalin (75 mg daily) or placebo for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was an adequate relief response rate. The secondary outcomes were improvement in quality of life, pain scores in divided categories, and safety profile. ResultsOf 72 patients enrolled, 34 received pregabalin and 38 received placebo. The self-reported adequate relief rates in the pregabalin and placebo groups were 70.6% and 42.1% at week 4 (P = 0.02), and 70.6% and 44.7% at week 8 (P = 0.03), respectively. The reduction in global symptoms in the pregabalin and placebo groups were 11.7 ± 10.6 and 3.7 ± 8.9 points at week 4 (P < 0.01) and 15.1 ± 12.2 and 8.0 ± 10.2 points at week 8 (P = 0.01), respectively. Pregabalin improved the overall quality of life (P = 0.03). The most common adverse event with pregabalin was dizziness, occurring in 51.6% of patients. ConclusionsPregabalin led to significant alleviation of dyspeptic symptoms, especially in patients with predominant epigastric pain .Thaiclinicaltrials.org #TCTR20200404002.

pharmacology & pharmacy,gastroenterology & hepatology
MDS evidence‐based review of treatments for essential tremor

Joaquim J. Ferreira,Tiago A. Mestre,Kelly E. Lyons,Julián Benito‐León,Eng‐King Tan,Giovanni Abbruzzese,Mark Hallett,Dietrich Haubenberger,Rodger Elble,Günther Deuschl,on behalf of MDS Task Force on Tremor and the MDS Evidence Based Medicine Committee,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.27700

IF: 9.698

2019-05-02

Movement Disorders

Abstract:Essential tremor is one of the most prevalent movement disorders. Many treatments for essential tremor have been reported in clinical practice, but it is uncertain which options have the most robust evidence. The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society commissioned a task force on tremor to review clinical studies of treatments for essential tremor.To conduct an evidence‐based review of current pharmacological and surgical treatments for essential tremor, using standardized criteria defined a priori by the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.We followed the recommendations of the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Evidence Based Medicine Committee.Sixty‐four studies of pharmacological and surgical interventions were included in the review. Propranolol and primidone were classified as clinically useful, similar to Topiramate, but only for doses higher than 200 mg/day. Alprazolam and botulinum toxin type A were classified as possibly useful. Unilateral Ventralis intermedius thalamic DBS, radiofrequency thalamotomy, and MRI‐guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy were considered possibly useful. All the above recommendations were made for limb tremor in essential tremor. There was insufficient evidence for voice and head tremor as well as for the remaining interventions. Propranolol, primidone, and topiramate (>200 mg/day) are the pharmacological interventions in which the data reviewed robustly supported efficacy. Their safety profile and patient preference may guide the prioritization of these interventions in clinical practice. MRI‐guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy was, for the first time, assessed and was considered to be possibly useful. There is a need to improve study design in essential tremor and overcome the limitation of small sample sizes, cross‐over studies, short‐term follow‐up studies, and use of nonvalidated clinical scales. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

clinical neurology
Efficacy of Pregabalin in the Treatment of Postherpetic Neuralgia : a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Jun Yin,Yuanming Pan,Zhenhua Zeng,Jianguo Guo,Juan Yang,Zhiying Feng

2016-01-01

Abstract:We aimed to summarize the efficacy of pregabalin in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in pain reduction, sleep improvement and overall improvement of the patients in published studies. A literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of pregabalin for PHN was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane database. For each trial met the inclusion criteria, study design, treatment comparators, dosage and duration, patient demographics and efficacy outcomes were extracted. The primary end point was treatment efficacy outcomes and the secondary end points included endpoint mean sleep interference score, percentage of 30% or 50% pain responders, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). A total of 5 RCTs with 9 different dosing groups involving 811 patients in the pregabalin group and 814 patients in the control group were included. The pooled SMD of mean pain score reductions was -0.651 (95% CI, -0.866, -0.435, P<0.001) in the pregabalin group compared with the placebo group. Higher dosing regimens resulted in greater reduction in pain score within a certain study but were not consistent among studies. Higher rate of patients with more than 30% and 50% pain score reduction in the pregabalin group vs. the placebo group. Significant benefits in mean sleep interference score and PGIC were observed in the pregabalin group vs. the control group. Higher dosing regimens yielded more improvement within each study but were not consistent among different studies. Pregabalin is effective in reducing the mean pain score and sleep interference score, increasing the percentage of 30% and 50% pain responders in comparison with placebo. Future studies are warranted to elucidate the effect of different dosing regimens on the treatment outcome.
Benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain: a rapid review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Igho J Onakpoya,Elizabeth T Thomas,Joseph J Lee,Ben Goldacre,Carl J Heneghan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023600

IF: 3.006

2019-01-21

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objective: To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain. Design: Rapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials. Participants: Adults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria. Interventions: Pregabalin or placebo. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Our primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events. Results: We included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence). Conclusion: Pregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.
Essential Tremors: A Literature Review of Current Therapeutics

Maurya D Patel,Muskaan Patel,Rutva Jani,Kishan G Patel,Priyansh Patel,Siddharth Kamal Gandhi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.59451

2024-05-01

Cureus

Abstract:Essential tremors (ETs) commonly manifest as involuntary shaking of the hands that disrupt daily activities. These tremors involve the central motor network of the cerebellum, thalamus, and cortical networks, leading to different clinical phenotypes. The goal of this review was to establish evidence-based recommendations for effective care and simplify decisions for those dealing with ET. For this narrative literature review, we conducted a thorough search using core keywords such as "essential tremor" and "therapy." From the 27 selected articles, relevant data were presented regarding pathophysiology, medications, and other treatment options, with necessary supplemental data such as side effects and use cases. This paper examines treatments for ET, including commonly prescribed medications such as propranolol and primidone; invasive treatments such as deep brain stimulation, focused ultrasound thalamotomy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and some surgical methods; and non-invasive methods such as the neuromodulation technique of transcutaneous afferent patterned stimulation. Overall, this study presents a synthesized understanding of the currently available modalities for managing ETs. It is intended to guide care providers in choosing the best possible method to contain symptoms.
Curative effect of gabapentin on refractory epilepsy]

Guo-Xing Zhu,Mei-Ping Ding,Bo Xiao,De-Xin Wang,De-Sheng Wang,Yi-Zhen Pan,Qing-Chen Zhao,Yang-Fu Pan,Guang-Yu Ma,Zhen Hong,Chuan-Zhen Lü

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/j:issn:0376-2491.2005.02.006

2005-01-01

Abstract:To assess the safety and efficacy of gabapentin in treatment of refractory epilepsy.Sixty-six patients with refractory epilepsy were treated with gabapentin 200 mg/d and 72 patients with placebo, totally 138 patients in five hospitals in different cities in China. Double-blind study was performed to observe the times of seizure, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Activities of Daily Life (ADL) assessment were conducted every 4 weeks.In comparison with the control group, the seizure times at any time point in the GB group all decreased with significant differences at the 12th and 20th weeks. The significant efficacy rates, with the seizure times decreasing by more than 75%, in the gabapentin group were higher than those in the control group, with significant differences in the 4, 8, 16, and 20th weeks. Both the MMSE scores of the 2 groups were raised with a significant difference between the 2 groups at the 16 weeks. There was no significant difference in ADL between these 2 groups. No serious side effect was found in these 2 groups.Gabapentin at a dosage of 1200 mg/d is safe and effective in treatment of epilepsy.
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate pregabalin efficacy in the treatment of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in patients with Alzheimer's disease

Leyla Maleki,Fatemeh Mohammadian,Mahsa Panahishokouh,Niayesh Mohebbi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2024.1460325

IF: 4.3

2024-11-28

Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract:Background: Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia (BPSD) are common during Alzheimer's disease and cause severe problems for patients and their caregivers. Objectives: To assess the therapeutic efficacy of Pregabalin in comparison with a placebo in treating BPSD in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) visiting the memory and cognition clinic of Roozbeh Psychiatric Hospital in Tehran, Iran. Methods: A 12-week double-blind, randomized comparison of Pregabalin and placebo treatments was conducted in 53 patients with DSM-V diagnosis of dementia of Alzheimer's type. They were randomly assigned to receive Pregabalin (doses: 50 titrated up to 300 mg/day) or a placebo. Clinical response was evaluated using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and the Behavioral Pathology in AD Rating Scale (BEHAVE-AD) scores compared with baseline. Side effects were also recorded carefully. Results: Patients receiving Pregabalin had better outcomes in comparison with patients receiving a placebo regarding both NPI and BEHAVE-AD scores after 12 weeks ( p -value = 0.009 for NPI and p -value = 0.003 for BEHAVE-AD). There was also a statistically significant decrease in the treatment group depression sub-score regarding NPI and BEHAVE-AD (respectively, p -value =0.000, 0.003). The caregiver burden sub-score of the NPI test was also lower in patients receiving pregabalin ( p -value = 0.000). There was no statistically significant difference between the occurrence of adverse effects between the two groups ( p -value = 1.00). Conclusion: Pregabalin at a dose of 300 mg/day was well tolerated and associated with reductions in the severity and frequency of behavioral symptoms in patients with AD. Pregabalin could be considered a favorable choice for treating BPSD in adults with mild to moderate stages of Alzheimer 's-type dementia, considering its befitting safety profile. Clinical trial registration: https://www.irct.ir/trial/52750, identifier IRCT20201201049553N1

neurosciences
Incidental enhancing lesions found on preoperative breast MRI: management and role of second-look ultrasound

M. Luciani,F. Pediconi,M. Telesca,F. Vasselli,V. Casali,E. Miglio,R. Passariello,C. Catalano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-011-0630-8

2011-02-01

La radiologia medica

Abstract:
Anti-Tremor Action of Subtype Selective Positive Allosteric Modulators of GABAA Receptors in a Rat Model of Essential Tremors

Dipak V Amrutkar,Tino Dyhring,Thomas A Jacobsen,Janus S Larsen,Karin Sandager-Nielsen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-020-01106-w

Abstract:Essential tremor (ET) is among the most prevalent neurological disorders and the most common cause of abnormal tremors. It is characterized by postural and action tremors ranging from 4 to 12 Hz. The treatments of choice for ET are propranolol and primidone, but their use is associated with adverse effects like hypotension, depression, and cognitive impairments. Benzodiazepines, which nonselectively enhances the effect of GABA at the GABAA α1/2/3/5 receptors, have been shown to be effective in treating ET. Their use, however, is limited due to sedation, ataxia, tolerance development and memory impairment. Sedation and ataxia are attributed to the activity at the α1 subunit while cognitive impairment is ascribed to the action on the α5 subunit of the GABAA receptors. It can be hypothesized that subtype selective GABAA receptor modulators only acting via the α2, and α3 subunits may have an improved side effect profile while retaining the beneficial effects. Here, we have evaluated the effect of subtype selective GABAA α2/3/5 receptor modulators on harmaline-induced tremors in rats. The tremors were automatically quantified in tremor boxes. We show that the GABAA α2/3 subtype selective modulator NS16085 significantly and dose-dependently inhibits harmaline-induced tremors in rats, indicating that potentiation of α2- and α3-containing GABAA receptors is sufficient to ameliorate harmaline-induced tremors. These results provide the first support for a therapeutic role of a subtype selective GABAA α2/3 modulator in the treatment of ET.
A meta-epidemiological study on the reported treatment effect of pregabalin in neuropathic pain trials over time

Emma T. L. Cheng,Mohammad Cheik-Hussein,Noelle Lin,Adriane M. Lewin,James H. McAuley,Ian A. Harris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0280593

IF: 3.7

2023-01-20

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Background Pregabalin is a drug used to treat neuropathic pain, and its use has increased substantially since 2007. Early trials found a strong treatment effect on pain for post-herpetic neuralgia and diabetic neuropathy. However more recent studies have failed to replicate these results. Methods This meta-epidemiological study aimed to assess change in the reported effectiveness of pregabalin in neuropathic pain trials over time, and if a change is present, determine any associated factors. Data sources We performed electronic searches for published trials in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases; and unpublished trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry with no restrictions. Study selection We included randomized, placebo-controlled trials of pregabalin for treatment of neuropathic pain in adults. Data extraction and synthesis Two authors independently extracted study data: sample size and mean baseline, end-point and change in pain scores with measures of variance, trial end year, publication year, clinical indication, funding source, country of study, treatment duration, treatment dose, mean age and percentage male. Primary outcome measure We defined treatment effect as the mean difference in pain scores between pregabalin and placebo groups at trial end-point and assessed for change over time using a random-effects meta-regression, adjusted for sample size, indication, treatment duration (weeks) and treatment dose. Results We included 38 randomized published trials (9038 participants) and found that between 2003 and 2020, the reported treatment effect of pregabalin decreased by 0.4 points (95% CI: 0.3 to 0.6; p<0.001) on an 11-point pain scale per 5-year interval, from 1.3 points (95% CI: 1.0 to 1.5) in trials conducted in 2001–2005, to 0.3 (95% CI: -0.1 to 0.7) in trials conducted in 2016–2020. The reported treatment effect was lower than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 1.7 points across all time periods, doses and most indications and was not found to be associated with study characteristics. Conclusions The reported treatment effect or analgesic efficacy of pregabalin from clinical trials has diminished over time. Clinical recommendations may need to be re-evaluated to account for recent evidence and to consider whether pregabalin therapy is indicated.

multidisciplinary sciences
Mechanisms of tremor-modulating effects of primidone and propranolol in essential tremor

Katarina Vogelnik Žakelj,Neža Prezelj,Milica Gregorič Kramberger,Maja Kojović

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2024.107151

Abstract:Introduction: Primidone and propranolol are primary treatments for essential tremor, however the exact mechanisms underlying their efficacy are not fully elucidated. Understanding how these medications alleviate tremor may guide the development of additional pharmacologic treatments. Our prospective observational study employed transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to explore mechanisms of primidone and propranolol effects in essential tremor. Eyeblink classical conditioning (EBCC) was tested as a potential predictor of treatment response. Methods: Patients with essential tremor underwent two evaluations: prior to commencing primidone or propranolol and following a minimum of three months of treatment. Tremor severity was assessed using accelerometry and clinically. TMS was employed to study changes in corticospinal excitability - resting and active motor thresholds, resting and active input/output curves and intracortical excitability - cortical silent period (CSP), short interval intracortical inhibition intensity curve (SICI), long interval intracortical inhibition (LICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF), and short afferent inhibition (SAI). EBCC, a marker of cerebellar function, was studied at baseline. Results: Of the 54 enrolled patients (28 primidone, 26 propranolol), 35 completed both visits. Primidone effect on decreasing hand tremor was associated with decreased corticospinal excitability, prolongation of CSP, increased LICI, increased SAI and decreased SICI. Propranolol effect on hand tremor was associated with decreased corticospinal excitability and increased SAI. Better EBCC at baseline predicted better response to primidone. Conclusions: Primidone exerts its therapeutic effects by blocking voltage-gated sodium channels and by modulating GABA-A and GABA-B intracortical circuits. Propranolol's central effects are likely mediated via noradrenergic modulation of GABA outflow.
A Randomized Phase 2 KINETIC Trial Evaluating SAGE‐324/BIIB124 in Individuals with Essential Tremor

Rodger J. Elble,William G. Ondo,Kelly E. Lyons,Min Qin,Svetlana Garafola,Bonnie Hersh,TinaMarie Lieu,Dimitrios Arkilo,Rosalind Chuang,Kemi Bankole,Rajesh Pahwa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.29731

IF: 9.698

2024-02-17

Movement Disorders

Abstract:Background SAGE‐324/BIIB124 is an investigational positive allosteric modulator of GABAA receptors. Objective KINETIC (NCT04305275), a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, phase 2 study, evaluated SAGE‐324/BIIB124 in individuals with essential tremor (ET). Methods Individuals aged 18 to 80 years were randomly assigned 1:1 to orally receive 60 mg of SAGE‐324/BIIB124 or placebo once daily for 28 days. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in The Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale‐Performance Subscale (TETRAS‐PS) Item 4 (upper‐limb tremor) at day 29 with SAGE‐324/BIIB124 versus placebo. Results Between May 2020 and February 2021, 69 U.S. participants were randomly assigned to receive SAGE‐324/BIIB124 (n = 34) or placebo (n = 35). There was a significant reduction from baseline in TETRAS‐PS Item 4 at day 29 with SAGE‐324/BIIB124 versus placebo (least squares mean [standard error]: –2.31 [0.401] vs. –1.24 [0.349], P = 0.0491). The most common treatment‐emergent adverse events included somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and balance disorder. Conclusion These results support further development of SAGE‐324/BIIB124 for potential ET treatment. © 2024 Sage Therapeutics, Inc and The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

clinical neurology
Vigabatrin add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

Rebecca Bresnahan,Myrsini Gianatsi,Melissa J Maguire,Catrin Tudur Smith,Anthony G Marson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007302.pub3

IF: 8.4

2020-08-01

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2008 and updated in 2013. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition which affects up to 1% of the population. Approximately 30% of people with epilepsy do not respond to treatment with currently available drugs. The majority of these people have focal epilepsy. Vigabatrin is an antiepileptic drug licensed for use in drug‐resistant epilepsy. To assess the efficacy and tolerability of vigabatrin as an add‐on therapy for people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. For the latest update of this review, we searched the following databases on 1 November 2018: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid 1946 to 31 October 2018), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) are both included in the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web). We checked reference lists of retrieved studies for additional reports of relevant studies and contacted Hoechst Marion Roussel (manufacturers of vigabatrin) in 2000. We included randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, fully published trials of vigabatrin in people of any age with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. Two review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data using the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary analysis was by intention‐to‐treat (ITT). We evaluated: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, treatment withdrawal, adverse effects, dose‐response analysis, cognitive outcomes and quality of life. We presented results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% or 99% confidence intervals (CI). We identified 11 trials that included 756 participants (age range: 10 to 64 years). The trials tested vigabatrin doses between 1 g/day and 6 g/day. All 11 trials displayed a risk of bias across at least three risk of bias domains. Predominantly, the risk of bias was associated with: allocation concealment (selection bias), blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) and incomplete outcome data (attrition bias). Participants treated with vigabatrin may be two to three times more likely to obtain a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared with those treated with placebo (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.63; 4 studies; low‐certainty evidence). Those treated with vigabatrin may also be three times more likely to have treatment withdrawn although we are uncertain (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.25 to 6.55; 4 studies; very low‐certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, participants given vigabatrin were more likely to experience adverse effects: dizziness/light‐headedness (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.87; 9 studies; low‐certainty evidence), fatigue (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.51; 9 studies; low‐certainty evidence), drowsiness (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.44; 8 studies) and depression (RR 3.28, 95% CI 1.30 to 8.27; 6 studies). Although the incidence rates were higher among participants receiving vigabatrin compared to those receiving placebo, the effect was not significant for the following adverse effects: ataxia (RR 2.76, 95% CI 0.96 to 7.94; 7 studies; very low‐certainty evidence), nausea (RR 3.57, 95% CI 0.63 to 20.30; 4 studies), abnormal vision (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.67 to 4.02; 5 studies; very low‐certainty evidence), headache (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.92; 9 studies), diplopia (RR 1.76, 99% CI 0.94 to 3.30) and nystagmus (RR 1.53, 99% CI 0.62 to 3.76; 2 studies; low‐certainty evidence). Vigabatrin had little to no effect on cognitive outcomes or quality of life. Vigabatrin may significantly reduce seizure frequency in people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. The results largely apply to adults and should not be extrapolated to children under 10 years old. Short‐term follow‐up of participants showed that some adverse effects were associated with its use. Analysis of longer‐term observational studies elsewhere, however, has demonstrated that vigabatrin use can lead to the development of visual field defects. Background Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder affecting approximately 1 in 100 people. Around 30% of these people cannot control their epilepsy with currently available antiepileptic medication and are said to have drug‐resistant epilepsy. Most often, drug‐resistant epilepsy is focal in nature, meaning that the seizures start in one specific area of the brain. Vigabatrin is an antiepileptic medication that can be used as an add‐on treatment for drug‐resistant focal epilepsy, meaning that it is taken in addition to other antiepileptic medications. Main results We found 11 clinical trials, involving 756 people, which investigated vigabatrin as an add‐on for people with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy. The people in the trials were aged between 10 to 64 years and were given doses of 1 g/day to 6 g/day vigabatrin. We found -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Efficacy of pregabalin for peripheral neuropathic pain: results of an 8-week, flexible-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in China.

Yuzhou Guan,Xinsheng Ding,Yan Cheng,Dongsheng Fan,Lan Tan,Yongjun Wang,Zhongxin Zhao,Zhen Hong,Dong Zhou,Xiaoping Pan,Shengdi Chen,Andrew Martin,Haiyun Tang,Liying Cui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.02.007

IF: 3.637

2011-01-01

Clinical Therapeutics

Abstract:Several classes of medications such as tricyclic antidepressants, anticonvulsants, narcotic analgesics, and α2-δ ligands, such as pregabalin, have been reported to be efficacious in the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in whites. However, no large double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have been reported that evaluated the efficacy of pregabalin for the treatment of neuropathic pain in a Chinese population in China.The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of flexible-dose pregabalin in treatment of Chinese patients diagnosed with painful DPN or PHN.This was a double-blind, parallel-group study in which patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio and treated with either flexible-dose pregabalin, 150 to 600 mg/d, or corresponding flexible-dose placebo for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change in the mean pain score based on a daily pain rating scale (DPRS; ranging from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst possible pain]). Secondary end points included Daily Sleep Interference scale, short form-McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) scale, and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGIC) scales. Adverse events and physical and laboratory examination results were also collected.Pregabalin and placebo treatment groups were well-matched in terms of demographic and patient characteristics. On the primary outcome, end point change in mean DPRS score, treatment with pregabalin (N = 206) resulted in significant improvement compared with results with placebo (N = 102), with a least squares mean difference score of -0.6 (P = 0.005). With regard to responder rates, 64% and 52% of patients treated with pregabalin and placebo, respectively, reported ≥30% improvement in DPRS scores (P = 0.04). Treatment with pregabalin also resulted in significant efficacy compared with that of placebo on secondary measures, including SF-MPQ VAS score (P = 0.012), SF-MPQ present pain intensity index score (P = 0.003), sleep interference score (P = 0.023), and PGIC and CGIC scores (P = 0.004 and P = 0.001, respectively). Adverse events were observed in 50.0% of pregabalin patients and 40.2% of placebo patients (P = 0.105), with the most common adverse event being dizziness (11.2%).Study results suggest that relative to placebo, pregabalin in daily doses of 150 to 600 mg/d was effective and well tolerated in Chinese patients diagnosed with moderate-to-severe DPN or PHN, indicated through improved pain scores and PGIC scores.
Staged magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy for the treatment of bilateral essential tremor and Parkinson's disease related tremor: a systematic review and critical appraisal of current knowledge

Simone Cesarano,Gennaro Saporito,Patrizia Sucapane,Federico Bruno,Alessia Catalucci,Maria Letizia Pistoia,Alessandra Splendiani,Alessandro Ricci,Ernesto Di Cesare,Rocco Totaro,Francesca Pistoia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2024.1409727

IF: 3.4

2024-06-21

Frontiers in Neurology

Abstract:Introduction: Essential tremor (ET) and Parkinson's Disease (PD) are debilitating neurodegenerative disorders characterized by tremor as a predominant symptom, significantly impacting patients' quality of life. Magnetic Resonance-guided Focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) Thalamotomy is an innovative therapeutic option for the treatment of unilateral medically refractory tremor with fewer adverse effects compared to traditional surgical interventions. A recent CE approval allows appropriate patients to have their second side treated. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to analyze available current knowledge about the use of MRgFUS for the treatment of bilateral ET and PD related tremor, to identify the effectiveness and the risks associated with bilateral treatment. Methods: Eligible studies were identified by searching published studies in PubMed and Scopus databases from May 2014 to January 2024 and by identifying ongoing studies registered on the clinicaltrials.gov website. Data were summarized by considering the following information topics: the number of patients involved, the selected lesion target, the assessment tool used to evaluate clinical changes, the observed improvement, the reported side effects, and the time interval between the two treatments. The study was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024513178). Results: Nine studies were eligible for this review, 7 for ET and 2 for PD. The involved population included a variable number of patients, ranging from 1 to 11 subjects for ET and from 10 to 15 subjects for PD. The main lesional targets were the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus, the pallidothalamic tract and the cerebellothalamic tract bilaterally. All studies investigated the tremor relief through the Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) in patients with ET, and through the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) in patients with PD. A variable degree of improvement was observed, with all patients expressing overall satisfaction with the bilateral treatment. Adverse events were mild and transient, primarily involving gait disturbances, dysarthria, and ataxia. A standardized protocol for administering the two consecutive treatments was not identifiable; typically, the timing of the second treatment was delayed by at least 6 months. Conclusion: Available evidence supports the effectiveness and safety of staged bilateral MRgFUS treatments for ET and PD-related tremor.

neurosciences,clinical neurology
[A double blind placebo controlled randomized clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in induction of remission in patients with alcohol dependence].

N. Neznanov,N. Semenova,K. Rybakova,E. Skurat,E. Krupitsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/jnevro202012001133

Abstract:AIM To study the efficacy of pregabalin for relapse prevention and reduction of drinking in patients with alcohol dependence. MATERIAL AND METHODS One hundred recently detoxified out-patients with alcohol dependence were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Patients of the first group (n=50; 38 men, 12 women, age 43.0±1.27) received pregabalin (150 mg once a day at night time) for 3 months, while patients of the second group (n=50; 45 men, 5 women, age 45.92±1.4) received identically looking placebo. All patients received standardized manualized weekly counseling (medical management). Drinking was measured on the weekly basis with Time Line Follow Back technique and GGT enzyme activity. Also, craving for alcohol, depression, and anxiety were measured weekly with the number of scales. RESULTS Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated significantly higher retention in treatment and in remission in the pregabalin group (lower drop out and relapse rate) mediana (CL)-12 (10.4-13.6) weeks in the pregabalin group vs. 6 (4.5-7.5) in the placebo group, Log Rank Mantel-Cox test = 0.005). Proportion of patients, who completed treatment in the pregabalin group, was significantly higher compared to the placebo group: 50% vs. 24%. Mean duration of participation in the treatment program was also higher in the pregabalin group: 9.1±0.5 weeks vs. 7.1±0.5 in the placebo group. General linear model demonstrated the significant treatment group effect on: (1) total alcohol consumption (TAC) (mean grams of alcohol per day) with lower TAC in the pregabalin group and (2) on the number of heavy drinking days (NHDD) with lower NHDD in the pregabalin group. Mean NHDD per patient for the period of participation in the study was lower in the pregabalin group (3.6±0.7 vs. 6.4±0.8; p=0.009), while the mean number of abstinent (sober) days was higher (55.9±3.6 vs. 40.0±3.3; p=0.001). No significant differences between the two groups were found in the scores on craving for alcohol, depression and anxiety scales. GGT activity was also similar in both groups throughout the study with no significant between group differences. The rate of adverse events (sleepiness, dizziness, and headache) was insignificantly higher in the pregabalin group compared with the placebo group. All adverse events were mild, gradually disappeared, and did not require any medication. CONCLUSION Results of this study provide evidence that pregabalin in a low dose of 150 mg per day is an effective and safe medication for relapse prevention and reduction of drinking in patients with alcohol dependence.

Medicine
Mechanisms of polymorphonuclear leukocyte mediated peritoneal mesothelial cell injury.

S. Andreoli,C. Mallett,K. Williams,J. Mcateer,R. Rothlein,C. Doerschuk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/KI.1994.372

IF: 19.6

1994-10-01

Kidney International

Abstract:

Levels of gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase in cultured skin fibroblasts from cystinotics and normals.

Alprazolam for essential tremor

Pregabalin add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin for Postherpetic Neuralgia in A Population of Chinese Patients

Randomised clinical trial: the effects of pregabalin vs placebo on functional dyspepsia

MDS evidence‐based review of treatments for essential tremor

Efficacy of Pregabalin in the Treatment of Postherpetic Neuralgia : a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain: a rapid review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Essential Tremors: A Literature Review of Current Therapeutics

Curative effect of gabapentin on refractory epilepsy]

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate pregabalin efficacy in the treatment of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in patients with Alzheimer's disease

Incidental enhancing lesions found on preoperative breast MRI: management and role of second-look ultrasound

Anti-Tremor Action of Subtype Selective Positive Allosteric Modulators of GABAA Receptors in a Rat Model of Essential Tremors

A meta-epidemiological study on the reported treatment effect of pregabalin in neuropathic pain trials over time

Mechanisms of tremor-modulating effects of primidone and propranolol in essential tremor

A Randomized Phase 2 KINETIC Trial Evaluating SAGE‐324/BIIB124 in Individuals with Essential Tremor

Vigabatrin add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

Efficacy of pregabalin for peripheral neuropathic pain: results of an 8-week, flexible-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in China.

Staged magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy for the treatment of bilateral essential tremor and Parkinson's disease related tremor: a systematic review and critical appraisal of current knowledge

[A double blind placebo controlled randomized clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in induction of remission in patients with alcohol dependence].

Mechanisms of polymorphonuclear leukocyte mediated peritoneal mesothelial cell injury.