Dataset Information

Gabapentin Enacarbil Extended-Release Versus Placebo: A Likely Responder Reanalysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We reanalyzed a multisite 26-week randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial of 600 mg twice-a-day Gabapentin Enacarbil Extended-Release (GE-XR), a gabapentin prodrug, designed to evaluate safety and efficacy for treating alcohol use disorder. In the original analysis (n = 338), published in 2019, GE-XR did not differ from placebo. Our aim is to advance precision medicine by identifying likely responders to GE-XR from the trial data and to determine for likely responders if GE-XR is causally superior to placebo.

Methods

The primary outcome measure in the reanalysis is the reduction from baseline of the number of heavy drinking days (ΔHDD). Baseline features including measures of alcohol use, anxiety, depression, mood states, sleep, and impulsivity were used in a random forest (RF) model to predict ΔHDD to treatment with GE-XR based on those assigned to GE-XR. The resulting RF model was used to obtain predicted outcomes for those randomized to GE-XR and counterfactually to those randomized to placebo. Likely responders to GE-XR were defined as those predicted to have a reduction of 14 days or more. Tests of causal superiority of GE-XR to placebo were obtained for likely responders and for the whole sample.

Results

For likely responders, GE-XR was causally superior to placebo (p < 0.0033), while for the whole sample, there was no difference. Likely responders exhibited improved outcomes for the related outcomes of percent HDD and drinks per week. Compared with unlikely responders, at baseline likely responders had higher HDDs; lower levels of anxiety, depression, and general mood disturbances; and higher levels of cognitive and motor impulsivity.

Conclusions

There are substantial causal benefits of treatment with GE-XR for a subset of patients predicted to be likely responders. The likely responder statistical paradigm is a promising approach for analyzing randomized clinical trials to advance personalized treatment.

SUBMITTER: Laska EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7540534 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:This is a feasibility study evaluating the safety, tolerability, and potential anxiolytic efficacy of the ?2 agonist guanfacine extended-release (GXR) in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), separation anxiety disorder (SAD), or social phobia/social anxiety disorder. METHODS:Youth aged 6-17 years with a primary diagnosis of GAD, SAD, and/or social anxiety disorder were treated with flexibly dosed GXR (1-6?mg daily, n?=?62) or placebo (n?=?21) for 12 weeks. The primary aim of this study was to determine the safety and tolerability of GXR in youth with anxiety disorders, which involved the analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), the emergence of suicidal ideation and behaviors, vital signs, and electrocardiographic/laboratory parameters. Exploratory efficacy measures included dimensional anxiety scales (Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale [PARS] and Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders [SCARED]), as well as the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale. As this was an exploratory study, no inferential statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS:GXR was safe and well tolerated. Treatment-related mean?±?standard deviation changes in heart rate (GXR: 1.8?±?12 beats per minute [bpm] decrease; placebo: 0.5?±?11?bpm decrease), systolic blood pressure (GXR: 2.3?±?11?mm Hg decrease; placebo: 1.7?±?11?mm Hg decrease), or diastolic blood pressure (GXR: 1.3?±?9?mm Hg decrease; placebo: 0.9?±?7?mm Hg increase) were similar between treatment groups. TEAEs, including headache, somnolence/fatigue, abdominal pain, and dizziness, were consistent with the known safety profile of GXR. No differences were observed between treatment groups for PARS and SCARED scores, although at endpoint, a higher proportion of subjects receiving GXR versus placebo demonstrated CGI-I scores ?2 (54.2% vs. 31.6%), as rated by the clinician investigator. CONCLUSIONS:GXR was well tolerated in pediatric subjects with GAD, SAD, and/or social anxiety disorder. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01470469.

Project description:To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of gabapentin enacarbil (GEn) 1200 mg or 600 mg compared with placebo in subjects with moderate-to-severe primary restless legs syndrome (RLS).This 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized subjects (1:1:1) to GEn 1200 mg, 600 mg, or placebo. Co-primary endpoints: mean change from baseline in International Restless Legs Scale (IRLS) total score and proportion of responders (rated as "very much" or "much" improved) on the investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I) at Week 12 LOCF for GEn 1200 mg compared with placebo. Secondary endpoints included GEn 600 mg compared with placebo on the IRLS and CGI-I at Week 12 LOCF and subjective measures for sleep. Safety and tolerability assessments included adverse events.325 subjects were randomized (GEn 1200 mg = 113; 600 mg = 115; placebo = 97). GEn 1200 mg significantly improved mean [SD] IRLS total score at Week 12 LOCF (baseline: 23.2 [5.32]; Week 12: 10.2 [8.03]) compared with placebo (baseline: 23.8 [4.58]; Week 12: 14.0 [7.87]; adjusted mean treatment difference [AMTD]: -3.5; p = 0.0015), and significantly more GEn 1200 mg-treated (77.5%) than placebo-treated (44.8%) subjects were CGI-I responders (p < 0.0001). Similar significant results were observed with GEn 600 mg for IRLS (AMTD: -4.3; p < 0.0001) and CGI-I (72.8% compared with 44.8%; p < 0.0001). GEn also significantly improved sleep outcomes (Post-Sleep Questionnaire, Pittsburgh Sleep Diary and Medical Outcomes Sleep Scale) compared with placebo. The most commonly reported adverse events were somnolence (GEn 1200 mg = 18.0%; 600 mg = 21.7%; placebo = 2.1%) and dizziness (GEn 1200 mg = 24.3%; 600 mg = 10.4%; placebo = 5.2%). Dizziness increased with increased dose and led to discontinuation in 2 subjects (GEn 1200 mg, n = 1; GEn 600 mg, n = 1). Somnolence led to discontinuation in 3 subjects (GEn 600 mg).GEn 1200 mg and 600 mg significantly improve RLS symptoms and sleep disturbance compared with placebo and are generally well tolerated.

Project description:To assess maintenance of efficacy and tolerability of gabapentin enacarbil in patients with moderate to severe primary restless legs syndrome (RLS).This study (conducted April 18, 2006, to November 14, 2007) comprised a 24-week, single-blind (SB) treatment phase (gabapentin enacarbil, 1200 mg) followed by a 12-week randomized, double-blind (DB) phase. Responders from the SB phase (patients with improvements on the International Restless Legs Scale [IRLS] and investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale at week 24 and stable while taking a gabapentin enacarbil dose of 1200 mg for at least 1 month before randomization) were randomized to gabapentin enacarbil, 1200 mg, or placebo once daily at 5 pm with food. The primary end point was the proportion of patients experiencing relapse (worse scores on the IRLS and investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change scale on 2 consecutive visits at least 1 week apart or withdrawal because of lack of efficacy) during the DB phase.A total of 221 of 327 patients completed the SB phase, 194 (96 in the gabapentin enacarbil group and 98 in the placebo group) were randomized to DB treatment, and 168 (84 in the gabapentin enacarbil group and 84 in the placebo group) completed the DB phase. A significantly smaller proportion of patients treated with gabapentin enacarbil (9/96 [9%]) experienced relapse compared with the placebo-treated patients (22/97 [23%]) (odds ratio, 0.353; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.8; P=.02). Somnolence and dizziness were the most common adverse events. One death occurred (unintentional choking during the SB phase) and was judged as being unrelated to the study drug. No clinically relevant changes were observed in laboratory values, in vital signs, or on electrocardiograms.Gabapentin enacarbil, 1200 mg, maintained improvements in RLS symptoms compared with placebo and showed long-term tolerability in adults with moderate to severe primary RLS for up to 9 months of treatment.

Project description:Gabapentin is used for the treatment of hot flashes and neuropathic pain in breast cancer survivors, and is commonly used off-label for the treatment of anxiety. Yet, clinical trial evidence to support the use of gabapentin for anxiety symptoms is lacking. In a randomized, double-blinded controlled trial we compared 300 mg gabapentin versus 900 mg gabapentin versus placebo. Subjects were 420 breast cancer patients who had completed all chemotherapy cycles. Anxiety traits and current (state) anxiety were measured using the Speilberger Strait-Trait Anxiety Inventory at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks. Pain was measured at baseline using a 10-point scale. Analyses included analysis of covariance and ordinary least squares regression. At 4 weeks, state anxiety change scores were significantly better for gabapentin 300 and 900 mg (p = 0.005) compared to placebo. The magnitude of improvement was proportional to baseline state anxiety. At 8 weeks, the anxiolytic effects of gabapentin compared to placebo persisted (p < 0.005). We found no significant interactions. The lower dose (300 mg) was associated with the best treatment outcomes for all patients except those with the highest baseline anxiety. Given its similar pharmacology, efficacy in the treatment of hot flashes, and low cost, gabapentin may provide a low cost and parsimonious alternative treatment choice for breast cancer survivors presenting in primary care practices with anxiety symptoms. Gabapentin is effective for hot flashes, and, therefore, may provide therapeutic benefit for both anxiety and hot flashes at a generic drug price. For patients reluctant to take a controlled substance, such as a benzodiazepine, gabapentin may offer an alternative therapy. Similarly, patients with a history of substance use may benefit from gabapentin without risk of addiction or abuse. For cancer survivors experiencing both hot flashes and anxiety, gabapentin may provide a single effective treatment for both and is an alternative therapy for anxiety for patients unwilling to take a benzodiazepine or those with a history of substance use.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Sexual dysfunction is common in women with vulvodynia. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate whether extended-release gabapentin is more effective than placebo in improving sexual function in women with provoked vulvodynia and whether there is a relationship between treatment outcome and pelvic pain muscle severity that is evaluated by palpation with standardized applied pressure and (2) to evaluate whether sexual function in women with provoked vulvodynia would approach that of control subjects who report no vulvar pain either before or after treatment. STUDY DESIGN:As a secondary outcome in a multicenter double-blind, randomized crossover trial, sexual function that was measured by the Female Sexual Function Index was evaluated with gabapentin (1200-3000 mg/d) compared with placebo. Pain-free control subjects, matched by age and race, also completed Female Sexual Function Index for comparison. RESULTS:From August 2012 to January 2016, 230 women were screened at 3 academic institutions, and 89 women were assigned randomly to treatment. Gabapentin was more effective than placebo in improving overall sexual function (adjusted mean difference, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-2.2; P=.008), which included desire (mean difference, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-3.3; P=.04), arousal (mean difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.5; P=.004), and satisfaction (mean difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.5; P=.02); however, sexual function remained significantly lower than in 56 matched vulvodynia pain-free control subjects. There was a moderate treatment effect among participants with baseline pelvic muscle pain severity scores above the median on the full Female Sexual Function Index scale (mean difference, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-2.8; P=.02) and arousal (mean difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.6; P=.01) and pain domains (mean difference, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.9; P=.04). CONCLUSION:Gabapentin improved sexual function in this group of women with provoked vulvodynia, although overall sexual function remained lower than women without the disorder. The most statistically significant increase was in the arousal domain of the Female Sexual Function Index that suggested a central mechanism of response. Women with median algometer pain scores >5 improved sexual function overall, but the improvement was more frequent than the pain domain. We hypothesize that gabapentin may be effective as a pharmacologic treatment for those women with provoked vulvodynia and increased pelvic muscle pain on examination.