Lamotrigine in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy

Practical Management of Patients With Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Purpose

Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) has a significant impact on patients’ quality of life, affecting sleep, mood, mobility, ability to work, interpersonal relationships, overall self-worth, and independence. The purpose of this article is to provide diabetes educators with current and essential tools for PDN assessment and management.

Methods

Medline and CINAHL database searches identified publications on the assessment and treatment of PDN. Identified research was evaluated, and information pertinent to diabetes educators was summarized.

Results

Recent advancements in assessment of neuropathic pain include identifying characteristics that distinguish between neuropathic and nonneuropathic pain. In the absence of treatment, research demonstrates that nerve damage may progress while pain diminishes. Many disease-modifying and symptom-management treatment options are available.

Conclusion

Good glycemic control is the first priority for both prevention and management of PDN. However, even with good glycemic control, up to 20% of patients will develop PDN. PDN recognition and assessment are critical to optimize management. Although several treatment modalities are available, few patients obtain complete pain relief. Recent advances in understanding the mechanisms underlying neuropathic pain should lead to better treatment and patient outcomes. Combination therapy, including nonpharmacologic modalities, may be required. Research evaluating the efficacy of combination therapy is needed.

Lamotrigine for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review entitled Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain published in Issue 2, 2007, and updated in Issue 2, 2011. Some antiepileptic medicines have a place in the treatment of neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This updated review adds no new additional studies looking at evidence for lamotrigine as an effective treatment for chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia. The update uses higher standards of evidence than previously.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of lamotrigine in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, and to evaluate adverse effects reported in the studies.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lamotrigine for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia (including cancer pain) from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We ran searches for the original review in 2006, in 2011 for the first update, and subsequent searches in August 2013 for this update. We sought additional studies from the reference lists of the retrieved papers. The original review and first update included acute pain, but no acute pain studies were identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs investigating the use of lamotrigine (any dose, by any route, and for any study duration) for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia. Assessment of pain intensity or pain relief, or both, using validated scales. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. The first tier used data where studies reported the outcome of at least 50% pain reduction from baseline, lasted at least eight weeks, had a parallel group design, included 200 or more participants in the comparison, and reported an intention-to-treat analysis. First-tier studies did not use last observation carried forward (LOCF) or other imputational methods for dropouts. The second tier used data that failed to meet this standard and second-tier results were therefore subject to potential bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve included studies in 11 publications (1511 participants), all with chronic neuropathic pain: central post-stroke pain (1), chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain (1), diabetic neuropathy (4), HIV-related neuropathy (2), mixed neuropathic pain (2), spinal cord injury-related pain (1), and trigeminal neuralgia (1). We did not identify any additional studies. Participants were aged between 26 and 77 years. Study duration was two weeks in one study and at least six weeks in the remainder; eight were of eight-week duration or longer.No study provided first-tier evidence for an efficacy outcome. There was no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia at doses of 200 mg to 400 mg daily. Almost 10% of participants taking lamotrigine reported a skin rash.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Large, high-quality, long-duration studies reporting clinically useful levels of pain relief for individual participants provided no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia at doses of about 200 to 400 mg daily. Given the availability of more effective treatments including antiepileptics and antidepressant medicines, lamotrigine does not have a significant place in therapy based on the available evidence. The adverse effect profile of lamotrigine is also of concern.

Lamotrigine Versus Pregabalin in the Management of Refractory Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Randomized Open Label Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Carbamazepine (CBZ) formed the gold standard drug in trigeminal neuralgia (TN) treatment but faces high therapeutic failure. This defined the need to explore a second line of drug therapy. The study aimed at comparing two alternate drugs i.e. Lamotrigine (LTG) and Pregabalin (PGB), in the management of TN refractory to therapeutic doses of CBZ.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with diagnosis of refractory TN were enrolled and randomly allotted into 2 groups of 11 each. Each group was subjected to a crossover analysis using LTG and PGB together with CBZ, for a period of 6 weeks. Patients maintained a pain diary, the scores of which, along with global evaluation scores, determined the primary outcome. Reevaluation of symptoms after 6 months was done to assess long term efficacy with study drugs.

RESULTS

Both LTG and PGB were effective over CBZ alone (p < 0.05); however, statistically insignificant difference (p > 0.05) was observed between the two groups using Mann-Whitney tests. Unlike LTG, side effects like nausea, insomnia and concentration loss were minimal with PGB thus exhibiting greater patient compliance. Secondary analysis showed complete relief in 4 patients on PGB (mean dose 240.68 mg/day) while 6 had partial relief. Three patients on LTG (mean dose 310.90 mg/day) reported relapse of acute symptoms and required peripheral alcohol blocks.

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin has potential anti-neuralgia properties comparable to LTG. However, the level of patient's tolerance seen with PGB exceeds that with LTG. 6 months follow-up records suggest that PGB together with CBZ offers a more reliable pain control than with LTG.

Postamputation pain: epidemiology, mechanisms, and treatment

Postamputation pain (PAP) is highly prevalent after limb amputation but remains an extremely challenging pain condition to treat. A large part of its intractability stems from the myriad pathophysiological mechanisms. A state-of-art understanding of the pathophysiologic basis underlying postamputation phenomena can be broadly categorized in terms of supraspinal, spinal, and peripheral mechanisms. Supraspinal mechanisms involve somatosensory cortical reorganization of the area representing the deafferentated limb and are predominant in phantom limb pain and phantom sensations. Spinal reorganization in the dorsal horn occurs after deafferentataion from a peripheral nerve injury. Peripherally, axonal nerve damage initiates inflammation, regenerative sprouting, and increased "ectopic" afferent input which is thought by many to be the predominant mechanism involved in residual limb pain or neuroma pain, but may also contribute to phantom phenomena. To optimize treatment outcomes, therapy should be individually tailored and mechanism based. Treatment modalities include injection therapy, pharmacotherapy, complementary and alternative therapy, surgical therapy, and interventions aimed at prevention. Unfortunately, there is a lack of high quality clinical trials to support most of these treatments. Most of the randomized controlled trials in PAP have evaluated medications, with a trend for short-term Efficacy noted for ketamine and opioids. Evidence for peripheral injection therapy with botulinum toxin and pulsed radiofrequency for residual limb pain is limited to very small trials and case series. Mirror therapy is a safe and cost-effective alternative treatment modality for PAP. Neuromodulation using implanted motor cortex stimulation has shown a trend toward effectiveness for refractory phantom limb pain, though the evidence is largely anecdotal. Studies that aim to prevent PA P using epidural and perineural catheters have yielded inconsistent results, though there may be some benefit for epidural prevention when the infusions are started more than 24 hours preoperatively and compared with nonoptimized alternatives. Further investigation into the mechanisms responsible for and the factors associated with the development of PAP is needed to provide an evidence-based foundation to guide current and future treatment approaches.

Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. Some antiepileptic medicines have a place in the treatment of neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This updated review adds five new additional studies looking at evidence for Lamotrigine as an effective treatment for acute and chronic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of the antiepileptic drug lamotrigine in acute and chronic pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lamotrigine in acute, and chronic pain (including cancer pain) were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL up to January 2011. Additional studies were sought from the reference list of the retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs investigating the use of lamotrigine (any dose, by any route, and for any study duration) for the treatment of acute or chronic pain. Assessment of pain intensity or pain relief, or both, using validated scales. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. Only full journal publication articles were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Dichotomous data (ideally for the outcome of at least 50% pain relief) were used to calculate relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. Meta-analysis was undertaken using a fixed-effect model. Numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNTs) were calculated as the reciprocal of the absolute risk reduction. For unwanted effects, the NNT becomes the number needed to harm (NNH) and was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve included studies in 11 publications (1511 participants), all with chronic neuropathic pain: central post stroke pain (1), chemotherapy induced neuropathic pain (1), diabetic neuropathy (4), HIV related neuropathy (2), mixed neuropathic pain (2), spinal cord injury related pain (1), and trigeminal neuralgia (1); none investigated lamotrigine in acute pain. The update had five additional studies (1111 additional participants). Participants were aged between 26 and 77 years. Study duration was 2 weeks in one study and at least 6 weeks in the remainder; eight were of eight week duration or longer. There is no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating acute or chronic pain at doses of about 200-400 mg daily. Almost 10% of participants taking lamotrigine reported a skin rash.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The additional studies tripled participant numbers providing data for analysis, and new, more stringent criteria for outcomes and analysis were used; conclusions about lamotrigine's lack of efficacy in chronic pain did not change. Given availability of more effective treatments including antiepileptics and antidepressant medicines, lamotrigine does not have a significant place in therapy based on available evidence.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of lamotrigine in combination with other medications for neuropathic pain

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine added to gabapentin, a tricyclic antidepressant, or a nonopioid analgesic in patients whose neuropathic pain was inadequately controlled with these medications. Patients with neuropathic pain from diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, traumatic/surgical nerve injury, incomplete spinal cord injury, trigeminal neuralgia, multiple sclerosis, or HIV-associated peripheral neuropathy, who had a mean weekly pain score > or =4 on an 11-point numerical rating scale, were randomized to receive a flexible dose of lamotrigine 200, 300, or 400mg daily (n=111) or placebo (n=109) for up to 14 weeks (including eight weeks of dose escalation) in addition to their prestudy regimen of gabapentin, a tricyclic antidepressant, or a nonopioid analgesic. No statistically significant difference in the mean change in pain-intensity score from baseline to Week 14 (primary endpoint) was detected between lamotrigine and placebo (P=0.67). Differences between lamotrigine and placebo were not statistically significant for secondary efficacy assessments, including mean changes from baseline in the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, the Neuropathic Pain Scale, rescue medication use, and the percentages of patients rated as much improved or very much improved at the end of treatment on the Clinician Global Impression of Change scale and the Patient Global Impression of Change scale. Lamotrigine was generally well tolerated. Lamotrigine (up to 400 mg/day) added to gabapentin, a tricyclic antidepressant, or a nonopioid analgesic did not demonstrate efficacy as an adjunctive treatment of neuropathic pain but was generally safe and well tolerated.

Antiepileptic drugs in the treatment of neuropathic pain

Antiepileptic drugs are an effective treatment for various forms of neuropathic pain of peripheral origin, although they rarely provide complete pain relief. Multiple multicentre randomised controlled trials have shown clear efficacy of gabapentin and pregabalin for postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy. Theses drugs can be rapidly titrated and are well tolerated. Topiramate, lamotrigine, carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are alternatives for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy, but should be titrated slowly. Carbamazepine remains the drug of choice for trigeminal neuralgia; however, oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine are potential alternatives. There is an apparent need for large-scale randomised controlled trials on the efficacy of antiepileptic drugs in neuropathic pain in general, and in cancer-related neuropathic pain and neuropathic pain of central origin in particular. Trials with long-term follow-up are required to establish the long-term efficacy of antiepileptic drugs in neuropathic pain. There is only limited scientific evidence to support the idea that drug combinations are likely to be more efficacious and safer than each drug alone; further studies are warranted in this area.

Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Anticonvulsant medicines have a place in the treatment of neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This review looks at the evidence for the pain relieving properties of lamotrigine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of the anticonvulsant lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) of lamotrigine (and key brand names Lamictal, Lamictin, Neurium) in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified from MEDLINE (1966 to August 2006), EMBASE 1994 to August 2006 and the CENTRAL register on The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2006). Additional reports were sought from the reference list of the retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs investigating the use of lamotrigine (any dose and by any route) for treatment of acute or chronic pain. Assessment of pain intensity or pain relief, or both, using validated scales. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. Only full journal publication articles were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Dichotomous data were used to calculate relative risk with 95% confidence intervals using a fixed effects model unless significant statistical heterogeneity was found. Continuous data was also reported where available. Meta-analysis was undertaken using a fixed effect model unless significant heterogeneity was present (I(2) >50%) in which case a random effects model was used. Numbers-needed-to-treat (NNTs) were calculated as the reciprocal of the absolute risk reduction. For unwanted effects, the NNT becomes the number-needed-to-harm (NNH) and was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen studies were identified. Nine studies were excluded. No studies for acute pain were identified. The seven included studies involved 502 participants, all for neuropathic pain. The studies covered the following conditions: central post stroke pain (1), diabetic neuropathy (1), HIV related neuropathy (2), intractable neuropathic pain (1), spinal cord injury related pain (1) and trigeminal neuralgia (1). The studies included participants in the age range of 26 to 77 years. Only one study for HIV related neuropathy had a statistically significant result for a sub group of patients on anti-retroviral therapy; this result is unlikely to be clinically significant NNT 4.3 (95% CI 2.3 to 37). Approximately 7% of participants taking lamotrigine reported a skin rash.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the availability of more effective treatments including anticonvulsants and antidepressant medicines, lamotrigine does not have a significant place in therapy at present. The limited evidence currently available suggests that lamotrigine is unlikely to be of benefit for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Randomized double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine and amitriptyline in painful diabetic neuropathy

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine and amitriptyline in controlling chronic painful peripheral neuropathy in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, crossover, active-control, clinical trial with variable dose titration was carried out (n = 53). Amitriptyline orally, at doses of 10, 25 and 50 mg at night-time, each dose for 2 weeks, and lamotrigine orally, at doses of 25, 50 and 100 mg twice daily, each dose for 2 weeks, by optional titration were used. There was a placebo washout period for 2 weeks between the two drugs. Assessment for pain relief, overall improvement and adverse events were carried out.

RESULTS

Good, moderate and mild pain relief were noted in 19 (41%), six (13%) and seven (15%) patients on lamotrigine and 13 (28%), five (11%) and 15 (33%) patients on amitriptyline, respectively, by patient's global assessment of efficacy and safety. Patient and physicians global assessment, McGill pain questionnaire and Likert pain scale showed no significant difference between the treatments, although improvement with both treatments was seen from 2 weeks. Of the 44 adverse events reported, 33 (75%) were with amitriptyline, sedation being the commonest [in 19 (43%) patients]. Lamotrigine caused adverse events in 11 (25%), of which rash in three (7%) and elevations of creatinine in four (9%) were the most common. The preferred lamotrigine dose was 25 mg twice daily.

CONCLUSIONS

As there are few differences between the two treatments in efficacy, lamotrigine 25 mg twice daily might be the first choice as it is associated with fewer adverse effects in our population.

Lamotrigine for treatment of pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: results of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine in pain associated with diabetic neuropathy, two replicate randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were conducted. Patients (n=360 per study) with painful diabetic neuropathy were randomized to receive lamotrigine 200, 300, or 400 mg daily or placebo during the 19-week treatment phase, including a 7-week dose-escalation phase and a 12-week, fixed-dose maintenance phase. The mean reduction in pain-intensity score from baseline to week 19 (primary endpoint) was greater (p < or = 0.05) in patients receiving lamotrigine 400 mg than placebo in Study 2 (observed scores, -2.7 versus -1.6 on a 0- to 10-point scale). This finding was not replicated in Study 1. Lamotrigine 200 and 300 mg did not significantly differ from placebo at week 19 in either study. Lamotrigine 300 and 400 mg were only occasionally more effective than placebo for secondary efficacy endpoints. The 200-mg dose did not separate from placebo. In a post hoc analysis of pooled data including only patients who reached their target dose, lamotrigine 400 mg conferred greater (p0.05) mean reduction in pain-intensity score from baseline to week 19 than placebo (-2.5 for 300 mg and -2.7 for 400mg versus -2.0 for placebo). Adverse events were reported in 71-82% of lamotrigine-treated patients compared with 63-70% of placebo-treated patients. The most common adverse events with lamotrigine were headache and rash. Compared with placebo, lamotrigine (300 and 400 mg daily) was inconsistently effective for pain associated with diabetic neuropathy but was generally safe and well tolerated.

Lamotrigine for neuropathic pain

Lamotrigine is an antiepileptic drug that stabilizes neural membranes by blocking the activation of voltage-sensitive sodium channels and inhibiting the presynaptic release of glutamate. Full length reports of five open trials and six out of seven randomized controlled trials (plus two abstracts) have demonstrated the efficacy of lamotrigine in the treatment of various forms of neuropathic pain. The present drug profile provides a review of the pharmacologic properties of lamotrigine, the clinical evidence related to its efficacy and safety, and discusses the current and future role of the drug in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Translating basic research on sodium channels in human neuropathic pain

A number of experimental studies in animals have suggested that voltage-gated sodium channels may play a crucial role in neuropathic pain. However, it is still difficult to translate the pathophysiological mechanisms identified in animal studies to the clinic and several questions regarding the role of sodium channels in neuropathic pain must therefore be addressed primarily in the clinical setting. Despite providing indirect information, pharmacologic challenge using sodium channel blockers, such as some antiepileptics, local anesthetics and derivatives, is the best way to investigate the role of sodium channels in the various clinical symptoms of neuropathies (eg, spontaneous pain, mechanical or thermal allodynia, and hyperalgesia). Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of these compounds for various neuropathic pain conditions. Recent psychophysical studies in which symptoms and signs are more accurately assessed indicate that these compounds act as antihyperalgesic agents rather than as simple analgesics. They also show that the sensitivity to these drugs is not affected by the aetiology of pain and the peripheral or central location of the nerve lesion. These data emphasize the role of peripheral and central sodium channels in neuropathic pain. Studies using more selective sodium channel blockers are required to gain further insight into the role of the various subtypes of sodium channel in these pain conditions.

PERSPECTIVE

Pharmacological challenge using sodium channel blockers is the best way to translate basic research on sodium channels in human neuropathic pain. To date, the role of sodium channels in neuropathic pain symptoms/signs is mostly documented for mechanical static and dynamic allodynia, and either peripheral or central sodium channels may be involved.

A treatment algorithm for neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain is a chronic pain syndrome caused by drug-, disease-, or injury-induced damage or destruction of sensory neurons within the dorsal root ganglia of the peripheral nervous system. Characteristic clinical symptoms include the feeling of pins and needles; burning, shooting, and/or stabbing pain with or without throbbing; and numbness. Neuronal hyperexcitability represents the hallmark cellular mechanism involved in the underlying pathophysiology of neuropathic pain. Although the primary goal is to alleviate pain, clinicians recognize that even the most appropriate treatment strategy may be, at best, only able to reduce pain to a more tolerable level.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to propose a treatment algorithm for neuropathic pain that health care professionals can logically follow and adapt to the specific needs of each patient. The algorithm is intended to serve as a general guide to assist clinicians in optimizing available therapeutic options.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature using the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Toxnet databases was conducted to design and develop a novel treatment algorithm for neuropathic pain that encompasses agents from several drug classes, including antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, topical antineuralgic agents, narcotics, and analgesics, as well as various treatment options for refractory cases.

RESULTS

Any of the agents in the first-line drug classes (tricyclic antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, topical antineuralgics, analgesics) may be used as a starting point in the treatment of neuropathic pain. If a patient does not respond to treatment with at least 3 different agents within a drug class, agents from a second drug class may be tried. When all first-line options have been exhausted, narcotic analgesics or refractory treatment options may provide some benefit. Patients who do not respond to monotherapy with any of the first- or second-line agents may respond to combination therapy or may be candidates for referral to a pain clinic. Because the techniques used at pain clinics tend to be invasive, referrals to these clinics should be reserved for patients who are truly refractory to all forms of pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuropathic pain continues to be one of the most difficult pain conditions to treat. With the proposed algorithm, clinicians will have a framework from which to design a pain treatment protocol appropriate for each patient. The algorithm will also help streamline referrals to specialized pain clinics, thereby reducing waiting list times for patients who are truly refractory to traditional pharmacotherapy.

The neurobiology of antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of nonepileptic conditions

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are commonly prescribed for nonepileptic conditions, including migraine headache, chronic neuropathic pain, mood disorders, schizophrenia and various neuromuscular syndromes. In many of these conditions, as in epilepsy, the drugs act by modifying the excitability of nerve (or muscle) through effects on voltage-gated sodium and calcium channels or by promoting inhibition mediated by gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) A receptors. In neuropathic pain, chronic nerve injury is associated with the redistribution and altered subunit compositions of sodium and calcium channels that predispose neurons in sensory pathways to fire spontaneously or at inappropriately high frequencies, often from ectopic sites. AEDs may counteract this abnormal activity by selectively affecting pain-specific firing; for example, many AEDs suppress high-frequency action potentials by blocking voltage-activated sodium channels in a use-dependent fashion. Alternatively, AEDs may specifically target pathological channels; for example, gabapentin is a ligand of alpha2delta voltage-activated calcium channel subunits that are overexpressed in sensory neurons after nerve injury. Emerging evidence suggests that effects on signaling pathways that regulate neuronal plasticity and survival may be a factor in the delayed clinical efficacy of AEDs in some neuropsychiatric conditions, including bipolar affective disorder.

Lamotrigine for intractable sciatica: correlation between dose, plasma concentration and analgesia

An open trial was conducted to study the potential efficacy of the antiepileptic agent lamotrigine in relieving the sciatic pain and the relationship between lamotrigine dosage, plasma concentration and the clinical response. Subsequent to a 1 week washout period from previous analgesics, lamotrigine dose was titrated on a weekly basis from 25 to 400mg/day and was maintained at that dose for additional 4 weeks. Spontaneous pain, the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SFMPQ), the Straight Leg Raise (SLR) test, and range of motion of the lumbar spine (leaning foreword, to the affected side) were used to assess lamotrigine efficacy. Lamotrigine plasma concentration was tested at the end of each week during the titration period and at the end of the study. Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study. All outcome measurers improved compared to baseline during the titration period, but reached a statistically significant level of improvement only at the 400mg dose. A linear correlation was found between mean lamotrigine dose, mean plasma concentration and mean weekly spontaneous pain, mean SLR and mean bending the affected side, but not with the SFMPQ score. Study results suggest lamotrigine is a potentially effective and safe compound for the treatment of painful lumbar radiculopathy, and that it is likely to act in a dose- and plasma concentration-dependent fashion.

New treatments for diabetic neuropathy: symptomatic treatments

Painful diabetic neuropathy is a common distressing and challenging condition. The mechanism or mechanisms involved in its pathogenesis continue to elude clinical scientists. As with other conditions of painful distal symmetrical neuropathic conditions, pain relief involves the use of a variety of analgesic and neuroleptic drugs, aimed at reducing either central responses to painful stimuli or at dampening spontaneous irritability of affected neurons. More recently, several therapies directed at putative pathologic mechanisms specific to painful diabetic neuropathy have evolved. These include vasodilators, protein kinase C beta inhibition, antioxidants, and novel aldose reductase inhibitors. Preliminary clinical studies of these therapies have at present involved small numbers of patients; however, the results have been encouraging. This article considers the clinical aspects of diagnosis and management of chronic painful diabetic neuropathy, focusing on existing and newer therapies.

Medical evaluation and treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy

Diabetes mellitus is a major health concern that is only expected to become more prevalent over the next few decades. It causes much morbidity and mortality through various macro- and microvascular complications, including diabetic neuropathy. Currently, there is no treatment that directly affects the natural course of diabetic neuropathy except for rigorous glycemic control, a goal that is not always achievable. Despite these therapeutic limitations, the morbidity caused by diabetic neuropathy can be minimized by early and accurate diagnosis. A detailed history and physical examination, along with carefully selected laboratory tests will confirm the presence of diabetic neuropathy while excluding other etiologies that may require alternative management strategies. Treatment is always tailored to the patient's symptoms. In addition to improved glycemic control, health care providers can provide education, support, and symptomatic relief. There are many pain modulating therapies that are effective in diabetic neuropathy as discussed above. Nortriptyline at low doses is an inexpensive well-tolerated medication that is effective. Gabapentin is an excellent choice when nortriptyline is ineffective or not tolerated. Other anticonvulsants, such as lamotrigine, carbamazepine, oxycarbazepine, and topiramate, may also provide benefit. Judicious use of narcotics is appropriate when other treatment modalities fail. The importance of treating underlying depression cannot be overemphasized. When gait becomes impaired as a result of neuropathy, appropriate prescription of assistive devices will prevent injuries from falls. Ankle-foot orthoses and other orthotic devices may allow patients to remain ambulatory and independent for a longer period. Despite the challenges ahead, the future holds the promise of more effective treatments for diabetes mellitus and its complications.

Pharmacotherapy of painful diabetic neuropathy

The scope of this review is to describe the epidemiology, physiology, symptomatology, and treatment of diabetic painful neuropathy, which is a common complication of diabetes with significant morbidity. This article focuses on treatment options. Various clinical trials of several classes of medications (eg, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and topical medications) and alternative treatments (eg, acupuncture, electrostimulation, magnets) are reviewed. Physicians have a large panel of medications that can be used effectively solely or in combination at their disposal. However, a number of these treatments have significant side effects, which are noted, that limit their use. As the understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of diabetic neuropathy improves, new medications are under investigation, which are reviewed in this article. There is great hope that the future may hold treatments that would prevent nerve damage.

The pathogenesis and management of painful diabetic neuropathy: a review

Painful diabetic neuropathy has always been a challenging complication of diabetes mellitus. Emerging theories suggest that early dysaesthesia associated with painful neuropathy may act as a marker for the development of the 'at risk' foot, allowing preventative clinical strategies to be undertaken. The mechanisms of neuropathic pain are complex. The authors' intentions are to help members of the diabetes care team better understand and appreciate the diverse symptoms reported by patients. The various treatments available for painful neuropathy are discussed in detail. Robust comparative studies on such treatments are, however, unavailable and the authors have designed a logical approach to management based on best current evidence and their own clinical experience.

Current and Future Strategies for the Management of Diabetic Neuropathy

Diabetic neuropathy is common, related to increased morbidity and mortality, and has no effective treatment at present. Interventions based on putative pathways thought to contribute to damage and repair of nerve fibres have yielded little success to date. Pain is a potentially debilitating manifestation of diabetic neuropathy and has many potential sites of origin and, hence, modulation. Its cause is unclear and it does not respond well to traditional pain therapies, proposed to mediate their benefits via multiple peripheral and central mechanisms. A better understanding of the mechanisms leading to nerve fibre degeneration and regeneration as well as pain has recently resulted in the development of a more targeted approach to the treatment of diabetic neuropathy. Thus, specific NMDA receptor antagonists and more specific neuronal serotonin and norepinephrine (noradrenaline) uptake inhibitors offer promise in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. A number of treatments which include the aldose reductase inhibitors and neurotrophins have failed to reach the clinical arena. However, the antioxidant alpha-lipoic acid, as well as compounds which correct vascular dysfunction and hence neuropathy, such as ACE inhibitors and protein kinase C-beta inhibitors, have demonstrated more success.

An overview of neuropathic pain: syndromes, symptoms, signs, and several mechanisms

OBJECTIVE

An overview is presented of neuropathic pain syndromes, their characteristic symptoms and signs, and recent approaches to identifying their pathophysiologic mechanisms.

DESIGN

The results of recent clinical studies of neuropathic pain are reviewed. Chronic neuropathic pain syndromes are emphasized because these long-lasting and often disabling conditions present a much greater challenge for the clinician than acute pain. Peripheral neuropathic syndromes have received greater attention in the research literature than central pain, and studies of syndromes such as postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy provide the basis for current knowledge of neuropathic pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Precise estimates of the prevalence of neuropathic pain are not available, but chronic neuropathic pain may be much more common than has generally been appreciated and its prevalence can be expected to increase in the future. There is considerable agreement that both peripheral and central processes contribute to many chronic neuropathic pain syndromes, and that these different mechanisms may explain the qualitatively different symptoms and signs that patients experience. The limitations of existing treatments for neuropathic pain and the inability to provide relief for many patients has stimulated ongoing studies that examine different approaches to preventing neuropathic pain.

Sodium valproate in the management of painful neuropathy in type 2 diabetes - a randomized placebo controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To study the effectiveness and safety aspects of sodium valproate in the management of painful neuropathy in patients of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial of sodium valproate was done in type 2 diabetic patients to assess its efficacy and safety in the management of painful neuropathy. We screened 60 patients but eight patients could not complete the study; hence, the present study was done on 52 patients. Each patient was assessed by clinical examination, pain score by short form of the McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and electrophysiological examination, which included motor and sensory nerve conduction velocity, amplitude and H-reflex initially and at the end of 1 month of treatment.

RESULTS

Significant improvement was noticed in the pain score of patients receiving sodium valproate in comparison to patients receiving placebo at the end of 1 month (P < 0.05). The changes in electrophysiological data were not significant. The drug was well tolerated by all patients except one who developed a raised aspartate transaminase (AST)/alanine transaminase (ALT) level after 15 days of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Sodium valproate is a well-tolerated drug and provides significant subjective improvement in painful diabetic neuropathy. These data provide a basis for future trials of longer duration in a larger group of patients.

SUNCT syndrome responsive to lamotrigine

BACKGROUND

Short-lasting, unilateral, neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection, tearing, rhinorrhea (SUNCT syndrome) is a headache form generally refractory to drug therapy. Occasional patients with SUNCT have been reported with a successful response to lamotrigine.

OBJECTIVE

To report two patients with SUNCT treated with lamotrigine.

METHODS

Clinical history, neurologic examination, and brain magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

Both patients with SUNCT syndrome were successfully treated with lamotrigine. In both cases, when lamotrigine was tapered off, the attacks reappeared, only to disappear when the dose was again increased. In addition, lamotrigine was well tolerated and no undesired side-effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

If the positive effect of lamotrigine in patients with SUNCT is confirmed in other cases, lamotrigine could become the first specific treatment for SUNCT syndrome.

A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover evaluation of a short course of 4030W92 in patients with chronic neuropathic pain

Several lines of evidence suggest that neuropathic pain is mediated in part by an increase in the density of voltage-sensitive sodium channels in injured axons and the dorsal root ganglion of injured axons. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety, analgesic efficacy, and tolerability of oral 4030W92 (a new novel sodium channel blocker) in a group of subjects with chronic neuropathic pain. This study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design in 41 subjects with neuropathic pain with a prominent allodynia. Each subject received a 2-week course of 4030W92 (25 mg/day) and placebo separated by a 2-week washout period. At baseline, postdose day 1, day 7, and day 14, the following were measured: (1) spontaneous and evoked pain scores, (2) dynamic and static allodynia mapping, (3) Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and (4) blood sample for 4030W92 assay. At baseline and day 14 the following were measured: (1) thermal testing in the painful area, (2) Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 Questionnaire, and (3) patient global satisfaction. Allodynia severity was significantly lower (P = .046) on treatment day 1, postdose for 4030W92 compared to placebo. However, this was not maintained on treatment day 7 or 14. The area of static allodynia was significantly smaller (P = .03) on treatment day 7 for 4030W92 compared to placebo. However, this was not maintained to treatment day 14. There was no significant effect of 4030W92 on any other efficacy measure. Side effects were minimal. 4030W92, at 25 mg/day, produced a nonsignificant reduction in pain without treatment limiting side effects. The maximum analgesic effect of this drug remains unknown.

Effect of lamotrigine on the Ca(2+)-sensing cation current in cultured hippocampal neurons

Concentrations of extracellular calcium ([Ca(2+)](e)) in the CNS decrease substantially during seizure activity. We have demonstrated previously that decreases in [Ca(2+)](e) activate a novel calcium-sensing nonselective cation (csNSC) channel in hippocampal neurons. Activation of csNSC channels is responsible for a sustained membrane depolarization and increased neuronal excitability. Our study has suggested that the csNSC channel is likely involved in generating and maintaining seizure activities. In the present study, the effects of anti-epileptic agent lamotrigine (LTG) on csNSC channels were studied in cultured mouse hippocampal neurons using patch-clamp techniques. At a holding potential of -60 mV, a slow inward current through csNSC channels was activated by a step reduction of [Ca(2+)](e) from 1.5 to 0.2 mM. LTG decreased the amplitude of csNSC currents dose dependently with an IC(50) of 171 +/- 25.8 (SE) microM. The effect of LTG was independent of membrane potential. In the presence of 300 microM LTG, the amplitude of csNSC current was decreased by 31 +/- 3% at -60 mV and 29 +/- 2.9% at +40 mV (P > 0.05). LTG depressed csNSC current without affecting the potency of Ca(2+) block of the current (IC(50) for Ca(2+) block of csNSC currents in the absence of LTG: 145 +/- 18 microM; in the presence of 300 microM LTG: 136 +/- 10 microM. n = 5, P > 0.05). In current-clamp recordings, activation of csNSC channel by reducing the [Ca(2+)](e) caused a sustained membrane depolarization and an increase in the frequency of spontaneous firing of action potentials. LTG (300 microM) significantly inhibited csNSC channel-mediated membrane depolarization and the excitation of neurons. Fura-2 ratiometric Ca(2+) imaging experiment showed that LTG also inhibited the increase in intracellular Ca(2+) concentration induced by csNSC channel activation. The effect of LTG on csNSC channels may partially contribute to its broad spectrum of anti-epileptic actions.

Adjunctive agents in the management of chronic pain

Chronic pain syndromes include cancer-related pain, postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy, and central poststroke pain and are common in the elderly. Adjunctive (or adjuvant) analgesics, defined as drugs that do not contain acetaminophen and those not classified as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory or opioid agents, play a role in the management of chronic pain. The term "adjunctive" (or "adjuvant") is a misnomer as several of these agents may constitute first-line therapy for many chronic pain syndromes. Tricyclic antidepressants have formed the backbone of therapy for chronic neuropathic pain for years. However, the difficulty with using agents of this class, due to their clinically significant adverse-event potential, has led to the evaluation of other agents, most notably, the antiepileptic drugs. The most useful are gabapentin, carbamazepine, and lamotrigine. In selected patients, baclofen, mexiletine, and clonidine may be useful as well. Cancer-related pain may respond substantially to corticosteroids, and pain associated with bone metastases to parenteral bisphosphonates and strontium. Practitioners should consider these alternative agents when treating chronic pain.

Lamotrigine reduces painful diabetic neuropathy: a randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of lamotrigine in relieving the pain associated with diabetic neuropathy.

METHODS

The authors randomly assigned 59 patients to receive either lamotrigine (titrated from 25 to 400 mg/day) or placebo over a 6-week period. Primary outcome measure was self-recording of pain intensity twice daily with a 0 to 10 numerical pain scale (NPS). Secondary efficacy measures included daily consumption of rescue analgesics, the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Pain Disability Index (PDI), and global assessment of efficacy and tolerability.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of 29 patients (83%) receiving lamotrigine and 22 of 30 (73%) patients receiving placebo completed the study. Daily NPS in the lamotrigine-treated group was reduced from 6.4 +/- 0.1 to 4.2 +/- 0.1 and in the control group from 6.5 +/- 0.1 to 5.3 +/- 0.1 (p < 0.001 for lamotrigine doses of 200, 300, and 400 mg). The results of the MPQ, PDI, and BDI remained unchanged in both groups. The global assessment of efficacy favored lamotrigine treatment over placebo, and the adverse events profile was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Lamotrigine is effective and safe in relieving the pain associated with diabetic neuropathy.

Glutamate receptors and nociception: implications for the drug treatment of pain

Evidence from the last several decades indicates that the excitatory amino acid glutamate plays a significant role in nociceptive processing. Glutamate and glutamate receptors are located in areas of the brain, spinal cord and periphery that are involved in pain sensation and transmission. Glutamate acts at several types of receptors, including ionotropic (directly coupled to ion channels) and metabotropic (directly coupled to intracellular second messengers). Ionotropic receptors include those selectively activated by N-methyl-D-aspartate, alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methylisoxazole-4-propionic acid and kainate. Metabotropic glutamate receptors are classified into 3 groups based on sequence homology, signal transduction mechanisms and receptor pharmacology. Glutamate also interacts with the opioid system, and intrathecal or systemic coadministration of glutamate receptor antagonists with opioids may enhance analgesia while reducing the development of opioid tolerance and dependence. The actions of glutamate in the brain seem to be more complex. Activation of glutamate receptors in some brain areas seems to be pronociceptive (e.g. thalamus, trigeminal nucleus), although activation of glutamate receptors in other brain areas seems to be antinociceptive (e.g. periaqueductal grey, ventrolateral medulla). Application of glutamate, or agonists selective for one of the several types of glutamate receptor, to the spinal cord or periphery induces nociceptive behaviours. Inhibition of glutamate release, or of glutamate receptors, in the spinal cord or periphery attenuates both acute and chronic pain in animal models. Similar benefits have been seen in studies involving humans (both patients and volunteers); however, results have been inconsistent. More research is needed to clearly define the role of existing treatment options and explore the possibilities for future drug development.

Lamotrigine in the management of neuropathic pain: a review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to examine the accumulating evidence indicating that lamotrigine is effective in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

METHOD

A review of the available literature.

RESULTS

Neuropathic pain is a debilitating series of conditions that are often poorly controlled. The molecular action of lamotrigine in terms of its effects in preclinical models of pain and hyperalgesia are considered along with the accumulating evidence suggesting that lamotrigine may be effective in the clinical management of neuropathic pain.

CONCLUSION

A review of the literature suggests that lamotrigine may be effective in the management of neuropathic pain.

Two new SUNCT cases responsive to lamotrigine

Short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) is a rare and debilitating headache form generally unresponsive to treatment. Following a recent report of a SUNCT patient who responded to lamotrigine, we tried this drug in two new SUNCT patients, reported here. In both cases prophylaxis was successful, suggesting lamotrigine might be the first effective treatment for this rare and debilitating headache syndrome.

Anticonvulsants for neuropathic pain syndromes: mechanisms of action and place in therapy

Neuropathic pain, a form of chronic pain caused by injury to or disease of the peripheral or central nervous system, is a formidable therapeutic challenge to clinicians because it does not respond well to traditional pain therapies. Our knowledge about the pathogenesis of neuropathic pain has grown significantly over last 2 decades. Basic research with animal and human models of neuropathic pain has shown that a number of pathophysiological and biochemical changes take place in the nervous system as a result of an insult. This property of the nervous system to adapt morphologically and functionally to external stimuli is known as neuroplasticity and plays a crucial role in the onset and maintenance of pain symptoms. Many similarities between the pathophysiological phenomena observed in some epilepsy models and in neuropathic pain models justify the rational for use of anticonvulsant drugs in the symptomatic management of neuropathic pain disorders. Carbamazepine, the first anticonvulsant studied in clinical trials, probably alleviates pain by decreasing conductance in Na+ channels and inhibiting ectopic discharges. Results from clinical trials have been positive in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia. The availability of newer anticonvulsants tested in higher quality clinical trials has marked a new era in the treatment of neuropathic pain. Gabapentin has the most clearly demonstrated analgesic effect for the treatment of neuropathic pain, specifically for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia. Based on the positive results of these studies and its favourable adverse effect profile, gabapentin should be considered the first choice of therapy for neuropathic pain. Evidence for the efficacy of phenytoin as an antinociceptive agent is, at best, weak to modest. Lamotrigine has good potential to modulate and control neuropathic pain, as shown in 2 controlled clinical trials, although another randomised trial showed no effect. There is potential for phenobarbital, clonazepam, valproic acid, topiramate, pregabalin and tiagabine to have antihyperalgesic and antinociceptive activities based on result in animal models of neuropathic pain, but the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of human neuropathic pain has not yet been fully determined in clinical trials. The role of anticonvulsant drugs in the treatment of neuropathic pain is evolving and has been clearly demonstrated with gabapentin and carbamazepine. Further advances in our understanding of the mechanisms underlying neuropathic pain syndromes and well-designed clinical trials should further the opportunities to establish the role of anticonvulsants in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

beta3, a novel auxiliary subunit for the voltage-gated sodium channel, is expressed preferentially in sensory neurons and is upregulated in the chronic constriction injury model of neuropathic pain

Adult dorsal root ganglia (DRG) have been shown to express a wide range of voltage-gated sodium channel alpha-subunits. However, of the auxiliary subunits, beta1 is expressed preferentially in only large- and medium-diameter neurons of the DRG while beta2 is absent in all DRG cells. In view of this, we have compared the distribution of beta1 in rat DRG and spinal cord with a novel, recently cloned beta1-like subunit, beta3. In situ hybridization studies demonstrated high levels of beta3 mRNA in small-diameter c-fibres, while beta1 mRNA was virtually absent in these cell types but was expressed in 100% of large-diameter neurons. In the spinal cord, beta3 transcript was present specifically in layers I/II (substantia gelatinosa) and layer X, while beta1 mRNA was expressed in all laminae throughout the grey matter. Since the pattern of beta3 expression in DRG appears to correlate with the TTX-resistant voltage-gated sodium channel subunit PN3, we co-expressed the two subunits in Xenopus oocytes. In this system, beta3 caused a 5-mV hyperpolarizing shift in the threshold of activation of PN3, and a threefold increase in the peak current amplitude when compared with PN3 expressed alone. On the basis of these results, we examined the expression of beta-subunits in the chronic constriction injury model of neuropathic pain. Results revealed a significant increase in beta3 mRNA expression in small-diameter sensory neurons of the ipsilateral DRG. These results show that beta3 is the dominant auxiliary sodium channel subunit in small-diameter neurons of the rat DRG and that it is significantly upregulated in a model of neuropathic pain.

Lamotrigine in the treatment of chronic refractory neuropathic pain

Many patients suffer from chronic, intractable neuropathic pain. Despite similar diagnoses and presumed pathophysiologies, symptoms and response to treatment can differ. Monotherapy is only occasionally successful. In this prospective survey, 20 patients with chronic, neuropathic pain not responding to interventional therapy received lamotrigine, sometimes as monotherapy and sometimes combined with oral morphine. The latter occurred in patients who lost pain relief from morphine after time. Ten patients did not respond to the drug; 4 were temporary responders and 6 patients obtained sustained pain relief. It is interesting that 5 patients regained opioid responsiveness and that the drug combination produced excellent pain relief for more than 5 months. We hypothesize an additive effect between morphine and lamotrigine.

Efficacy of pharmacological treatments of neuropathic pain: an update and effect related to mechanism of drug action

Tricyclic antidepressants and carbamazepine have become the mainstay in the treatment of neuropathic pain. Within the last decade, controlled trials have shown that numerous other drugs relieve such pain. We identified all placebo-controlled trials and calculated numbers needed to treat (NNT) to obtain one patient with more than 50% pain relief in order to compare the efficacy with the current treatments, and to search for relations between mechanism of pain and drug action. In diabetic neuropathy, NNT was 1.4 in a study with optimal doses of the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine as compared to 2.4 in other studies on tricyclics. The NNT was 6.7 for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, 3.3 for carbamazepine, 10.0 for mexiletine, 3.7 for gabapentin, 1.9 for dextromethorphan, 3.4 for tramadol and levodopa and 5.9 for capsaicin. In postherpetic neuralgia, the NNT was 2.3 for tricyclics, 3.2 for gabapentin, 2.5 for oxycodone and 5.3 for capsaicin, whereas dextromethorphan was inactive. In peripheral nerve injury, NNT was 2.5 for tricyclics and 3.5 for capsaicin. In central pain, NNT was 2.5 for tricyclics and 3. 4 for carbamazepine, whereas selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, mexiletine and dextromethorphan were inactive. There were no clear relations between mechanism of action of the drugs and the effect in distinct pain conditions or for single drug classes and different pain conditions. It is concluded that tricyclic antidepressants in optimal doses appear to be the most efficient treatment of neuropathic pain, but some of the other treatments may be important due to their better tolerability. Relations between drug and pain mechanisms may be elucidated by studies focusing on specific neuropathic pain phenomena such as pain paroxysms and touch-evoked pain.

Painful neuropathies

Pain following peripheral nerve lesion appears to be a paradox because damage of primary afferent nerve fibres carrying nociceptive information should result in hypoalgesia. The very existence of neuropathic pain therefore implies fundamental changes of nociceptive processing and there have been considerable advances in the understanding of factors that precipitate neuropathic pain. This knowledge has already been harnessed for the development of novel analgesic therapies to supplement traditional treatment with anticonvulsant and antidepressants drugs which has shown clear effectiveness in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials.