Search

This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of pregabalin-a novel alpha(2)-delta ligand with analgesic, anxiolytic, and anticonvulsant activity-for treating neuropathic pain in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN). Two hundred and thirty-eight patients were randomised into this multicentre, doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial to receive 150 (n=81), 300 mg/day (n=76) pregabalin, or placebo (n=81) for 8 weeks. Among the exclusion criteria was failure to respond to previous treatment for PHN with gabapentin at doses > or =1200 mg/day. Endpoint mean pain scores were significantly reduced in patients receiving 150 or 300 mg/day pregabalin compared with placebo. Efficacy was observed as early as week 1 and was maintained throughout the study. Significantly more patients in both pregabalin groups (150 mg, 26%; 300 mg, 28%) were responders (> or =50% decrease in mean pain score from baseline to endpoint) than in the placebo group (10%). Additionally, by week 1 and for the study's duration, 150 and 300 mg/day pregabalin significantly reduced weekly mean sleep interference scores. More pregabalin-treated patients than placebo-treated patients reported that they were 'much improved' or 'very much improved'. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measurements using the SF-36 Health Survey demonstrated improvement in the mental health domain for both pregabalin dosages, and bodily pain and vitality domains were improved in the 300 mg/day group. The most frequent adverse events were dizziness, somnolence, peripheral oedema, headache, and dry mouth. Pregabalin efficaciously treated the neuropathic pain of PHN. Additionally, pregabalin was associated with decreased sleep interference and significant improvements in HRQoL measures.

The analgesic efficacy and safety of dexketoprofen trometamol (the active enantiomer of the racemic compound ketoprofen) (25mg q.i.d.) vs. ketorolac (10mg q.i.d.) was assessed in 115 patients with bone cancer pain included in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group study. A level of >/=40 mm on the 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and >/=10 in the pain rating index were required for inclusion. At the end of treatment on day 7 (+1 day), mean values of VAS were 32+/-24 mm for dexketoprofen and 40+/-30 mm for ketorolac (P=0.12) but the pain rating index was significantly lower in patients given dexketoprofen (8.5+/-2.3 vs. 9.7+/-2.9, P=0.04). Moreover, most of the patients reached a pain intensity difference from baseline >/=20 mm (75% of patients for dexketoprofen and 65% of patients for ketorolac). Around half of patients in both treatments had a pain intensity <30 mm on VAS at the end of treatment (55% for dexketoprofen and 47% for ketorolac). In the overall assessment of efficacy, a higher percentage of both patients and physicians rated dexketoprofen as 'quite effective' or 'very effective' compared to ketorolac. The percentage of patients withdrawn from the study for any reason as well as for insufficient therapeutic effect or due to adverse events was lower in the dexketoprofen group than in the ketorolac group. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 16% of patients given dexketoprofen and in 24% given ketorolac. Serious adverse events occurred in 3.5% of patients from both groups but only one case of gastrointestinal hemorrhage was considered related to ketorolac. We conclude that dexketoprofen trometamol 25 mg q.i.d. oral route is a good analgesic therapy in the treatment of bone cancer pain, comparable to ketorolac 10 mg q.i.d., with a good tolerability profile.