MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367319314 · doi:10.1007/s40122-023-00513-1

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Mirogabalin for Central Neuropathic Pain: A Multinational, Phase 3, 52-Week, Open-Label Study in Asia

2023· article· en· W4367319314 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Takahiro Ushida, Yoichi Katayama, Yoichi Hiasa, Makoto Nishihara, Fumihiro Tajima, Shinsuke Katoh, Hirotaka Tanaka, Takeshi Maeda, Kazunari Furusawa, Yoshihiro Kakehi, Kunika Kikumori, Masanori Kuroha

Bibliographic record

VenuePain and Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDaiichi Sankyo EuropeDaiichi-Sankyo
KeywordsNeuropathic painMultinational corporationMedicineTerm (time)Open labelPhase (matter)AnesthesiaInternal medicineAdverse effectBusinessChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Central neuropathic pain (CNeP) is difficult to treat and has diverse etiology, including spinal cord injury (CNePSCI), Parkinson's disease (CNePPD), and central post-stroke pain (CPSP). The safety and efficacy of mirogabalin have been demonstrated in short-term trials, including patients with CNePSCI. The objective of our study was to confirm the safety/efficacy of mirogabalin in patients with CNePPD and CPSP, and obtain long-term data for CNePSCI. METHODS: This 52-week, open-label extension of a previous randomized controlled study was conducted across Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Patients with CNePSCI, CNePPD, or CPSP received twice daily (BID) 5-10 mg mirogabalin for a 4-week titration period, after which the dosage was maintained for 47 weeks at a maximum of 15 mg BID, followed by a 1-week taper period receiving the same dose but only administered once daily. The primary endpoint was safety, assessed primarily by incidence and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was assessed in a post hoc analysis of data obtained by the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). RESULTS: Of the 210 patients enrolled, 106, 94, and 10 had CNePSCI, CPSP, and CNePPD, respectively. The mean overall age of patients was 62.9 years, and most patients were male and of Japanese ethnicity. TEAEs occurred in 84.8% of patients, the most common being somnolence (16.7%), peripheral edema (12.4%), edema (11.4%), nasopharyngitis (11.0%), and dizziness (7.6%). Most TEAEs were mild. Severe and serious TEAEs occurred in 6.2% and 13.3% of patients, respectively. All patient groups experienced reductions in SF-MPQ visual analog scores for pain: mean ± standard deviation changes from baseline at week 52 were -2.3 ± 21.13 mm (CNePSCI), -17.0 ± 24.99 mm (CPSP), and -17.1 ± 35.32 mm (CNePPD). CONCLUSION: Mirogabalin was generally safe, well tolerated, and effective for treatment of CNeP in this long-term study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03901352.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain and TherapySame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207