Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24865794›Full record

ReviewPain2014

Research designs for proof-of-concept chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

Jennifer S Gewandter, Robert H Dworkin, Dennis C Turk, Michael P McDermott, Ralf Baron, Marc R Gastonguay, Ian Gilron, Nathaniel P Katz, Cyrus Mehta, Srinivasa N Raja and 28 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pain, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05864053 phase1 / phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

(2R,6R)-Hydroxynorketamine a Novel Therapeutic Analgesic for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain: A Randomized Double Blind Cross-Over Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorRush University Medical CenterRan2024 to 2027Enrolled25ConditionsPain, NeuropathicArmsKetamine, (2R,6R)-hydroxynorketamine, Saline
NCT07408193 early_phase1recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

The Role of Coadministration of Lidocaine and Ketamine in Opioid-Refractory Chronic Cancer-Related Pain: a Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Cross-Over Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensRan2026 to 2027Enrolled24ConditionsOpioid-Refractory Chronic Cancer-Related PainArmsLidocaine and Ketamine Infusion, Active Placebo (Midazolam) Infusion
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Journal of dental research · 2021
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

38 authors.

Jennifer S GewandterUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany Metrum Research Group, Tariffville, CT, USA Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada Analgesic Solutions, Natick, MA, USA Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA Cytel, Boston, MA, USA Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA CRP Santé, Strassen, Luxembourg CP Taylor Consulting, Ann Arbor, MI, USA American Chronic Pain Association, Rocklin, CA, USA Desjardins Associates and Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, USA Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA Merck, Blue Bell, PA, USA Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN, USA Virtuous Pharma, Inc., Raleigh-Durham, NC, USA University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA Richard L Leff MD LLC, Chadds Ford, PA, USA Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA Voyager Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, USA Johnson and Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA Imperial College, London, UK Faculdade de Medicina de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark Alpharma, Piscataway, NJ, USA Grünenthal GMbH, Aachen, Germany GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Palo Alto, CA, USA Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA Endo Pharmaceuticals, Chadds Ford, PA, USA.
Robert H Dworkin
Dennis C Turk
Michael P McDermott
Ralf Baron
Marc R Gastonguay
Ian Gilron
Nathaniel P Katz
Cyrus Mehta
Srinivasa N Raja
Stephen Senn
Charles Taylor
Penney Cowan
Paul Desjardins
Rozalina Dimitrova
Raymond Dionne
John T Farrar
David J Hewitt
Smriti Iyengar
Gary W Jay
Eija Kalso
Robert D Kerns
Richard Leff
Michael Leong
Karin L Petersen
Bernard M Ravina
Christine Rauschkolb
Andrew S C Rice
Michael C Rowbotham
Cristina Sampaio
Sren H Sindrup
Joseph W Stauffer
Ilona Steigerwald
Jonathan Stewart
Jeffrey Tobias
Rolf-Detlef Treede
Mark Wallace
Richard E White

Funding

INJURY-INDUCES PAIN-- CHEMICAL MODULATION OF NOCICEPTORSR01NS026363 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI RAJA, SRINIVASA N. · 1989 to 2021
$6.8M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS026363
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proof-of-concept (POC) clinical trials play an important role in developing novel treatments and determining whether existing treatments may be efficacious in broader populations of patients. The goal of most POC trials is to determine whether a treatment is likely to be efficacious for a given indication and thus whether it is worth investing the financial resources and participant exposure necessary for a confirmatory trial of that intervention. A challenge in designing POC trials is obtaining sufficient information to make this important go/no-go decision in a cost-effective manner. An IMMPACT consensus meeting was convened to discuss design considerations for POC trials in analgesia, with a focus on maximizing power with limited resources and participants. We present general design aspects to consider including patient population, active comparators and placebos, study power, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships, and minimization of missing data. Efficiency of single-dose studies for treatments with rapid onset is discussed. The trade-off between parallel-group and crossover designs with respect to overall sample sizes, trial duration, and applicability is summarized. The advantages and disadvantages of more recent trial designs, including N-of-1 designs, enriched designs, adaptive designs, and sequential parallel comparison designs, are summarized, and recommendations for consideration are provided. More attention to identifying efficient yet powerful designs for POC clinical trials of chronic pain treatments may increase the percentage of truly efficacious pain treatments that are advanced to confirmatory trials while decreasing the percentage of ineffective treatments that continue to be evaluated rather than abandoned.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicResearch DesignChronic PainHumansSample SizeClinical trialsIMMPACTMethodologyProof of concept

Identifiers

PMID24865794
PMCPMC4500524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.