Efficacy and Safety of Lacosamide in Painful Diabetic Neuropathy
- Dan Ziegler, MD, FRCPE (dan.ziegler{at}ddz.uni-duesseldorf.de)a,
- Tibor Hidvégi, MDb,
- Irina Gurieva, MDc,
- Sabine Bongardt, MSd,
- Rainer Freynhagen, MDe,
- David Sen, PhDf,
- Kenneth Sommerville, MDf and
- On behalf of the lacosamide SP743 Study Group
- a. Institute for Clinical Diabetology, German Diabetes Center at the Heinrich Heine University, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research and Department of Metabolic Diseases, University Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany
- b. Petz Aladár County Teaching Hospital, Department of Metabolism and Diabetes, Győr, Hungary
- c. Federal State Institution, Federal Bureau Medical Social Expertise, Moscow, Russia
- d. Schwarz Pharma, AG, UCB Group, Monheim, Germany
- e. Department of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care Medicine, Pain Therapy & Palliative Care, Pain Center Lake Starnberg, Benedictus Krankenhaus, Tutzing, Germany
- f. Schwarz Biosciences, Inc., UCB Group, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of lacosamide compared with placebo in painful diabetic polyneuropathy.
Research Design and Methods: Diabetic patients with at least moderate neuropathic pain were randomized to placebo or lacosamide 400 (in a slow or standard titration) or 600mg/day over 6-week titration and 12-week maintenance periods. Primary efficacy criterion was intra-individual change in average daily Numeric Pain Rating Scale score from baseline to the last 4 weeks.
Results: For the primary endpoint, pain reduction was numerically but not statistically greater with lacosamide compared with placebo (400mg/day,P=0.12;600mg/day,P=0.18). Both doses were significantly more effective compared with placebo over the titration (P=0.03,P=0.006), maintenance (P=0.01,P=0.005), and entire treatment periods (P=0.03,P=0.02). Safety profiles between titration schemes were similar.
Conclusions: Lacosamide reduced neuropathic pain and was well tolerated in diabetic patients, but the primary efficacy criterion was not met, possibly due to an increased placebo response over the last 4 weeks.
Footnotes
-
- Received August 24, 2009.
- Accepted January 3, 2010.
- Copyright © American Diabetes Association











