Kalpana R, Robert W S, Juzerehaji Fatema, Venkatachalapathy Ramesh, Jagadeesan M
Department of Neurology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, 603203, Tamil Nadu, Chengalpattu, India.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, 603203, Tamil Nadu, Chengalpattu, India.
Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2025 Jul 21. doi: 10.1007/s00210-025-04474-4.
Chronic neuropathic pain is characterized by complex pathophysiology, and its treatment is associated with significant healthcare costs and resources. Controlling pain intensity remains challenging, necessitating alternative therapeutic approaches. Lacosamide and pregabalin have shown efficacy in neuropathic pain management, but comparative studies, particularly in the Indian population, are limited. A prospective, open-label, randomized controlled, parallel-arm pilot study was conducted on patients of either gender > 18 years of age with definite or probable neuropathic pain lasting beyond three months. Of 72 screened patients, 36 were randomized to receive either lacosamide (50 mg BD P/O for 1 week, then 100 mg BD P/O for 3 months) or pregabalin (75 mg OD P/O for 3 months). Analgesic efficacy was assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and quality of life was evaluated with the SF-36 Questionnaire. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were assessed using the Naranjo Algorithm. SPSS software version 16.0 was used for statistical analysis, with p-values < 0.05 considered significant. Of 72 screened patients, 36 were randomized, and 7 dropped out, leaving 15 in the pregabalin group and 14 in the lacosamide group. The mean age was 52 years, and the mean BMI was 24 kg/m. Lacosamide significantly reduced pain (NRS: 7.7 to 2.50) compared to pregabalin (7.6 to 4.27) (p < 0.001), indicating greater effectiveness. Both drugs improved all SF-36 quality of life domains (p < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups in overall quality of life. Lacosamide therapy was more costly due to its twice-daily dosing. No serious ADRs were observed. Lacosamide is more effective than pregabalin in reducing chronic neuropathic pain and contributes to improved quality of life, comparable to pregabalin. Despite higher costs, lacosamide is safe and recommended for adults aged ≥ 18 years. Limitations include the open-label design, small sample size, lack of placebo control, and absence of neuropathic pain phenotype analysis, necessitating larger, double-blind trials to confirm findings.
慢性神经性疼痛具有复杂的病理生理学特征,其治疗涉及高昂的医疗成本和资源。控制疼痛强度仍然具有挑战性,因此需要 alternative therapeutic approaches。拉科酰胺和普瑞巴林在神经性疼痛管理中已显示出疗效,但比较研究,尤其是在印度人群中的研究有限。对年龄大于18岁、患有明确或可能的神经性疼痛且持续超过三个月的男女患者进行了一项前瞻性、开放标签、随机对照、平行组试点研究。在72名筛查患者中,36名被随机分配接受拉科酰胺(口服,50毫克,每日两次,持续1周,然后100毫克,每日两次,持续3个月)或普瑞巴林(口服,75毫克,每日一次,持续3个月)。使用数字评分量表(NRS)评估镇痛效果,并用SF-36问卷评估生活质量。使用纳兰霍算法评估药物不良反应(ADR)。使用SPSS软件16.0版进行统计分析,p值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。在72名筛查患者中,36名被随机分组,7名退出,普瑞巴林组剩下15名,拉科酰胺组剩下14名。平均年龄为52岁,平均体重指数为24千克/平方米。与普瑞巴林(7.6至4.27)相比,拉科酰胺显著减轻疼痛(NRS:7.7至2.50)(p<0.001),表明疗效更佳。两种药物均改善了所有SF-36生活质量领域(p<0.001),两组在总体生活质量方面无显著差异。由于拉科酰胺每日给药两次,其治疗成本更高。未观察到严重的药物不良反应。在减轻慢性神经性疼痛方面,拉科酰胺比普瑞巴林更有效,并且与普瑞巴林相当,有助于改善生活质量。尽管成本较高,但拉科酰胺是安全的,推荐给年龄≥18岁的成年人。局限性包括开放标签设计、样本量小、缺乏安慰剂对照以及缺乏神经性疼痛表型分析,因此需要进行更大规模的双盲试验来证实研究结果。