ArticlePain and therapy2025
Safety and Efficacy of Mirogabalin in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients with Peripheral Neuropathic Pain on NSAIDs: Post Hoc Analysis of the MiroTAS Study.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioequivalence and Comparative Pharmacokinetics of Two Generic Mirogabalin Besylate Tablets (5 mg and 10 mg) and TarligeEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2026Trial
- Clinical Outcomes after Onset of Mirogabalin-Related Adverse Drug Reactions in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Post Hoc Analysis of the MiroTAS Study.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe primary analysis of the MiroTAS study in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs showed that mirogabalin add-on therapy further improved pain and quality of life (QOL) without new safety concerns.
methodsThis post hoc analysis of the MiroTAS study examined the timing of onset of mirogabalin-related adverse drug reactions (mrADRs) (composite of somnolence, dizziness, edema, and peripheral edema), factors affecting safety and efficacy, and the relationships between baseline numbness severity (by spine painDETECT questionnaire [SPDQ] score), EQ-5D-5L scores, leg pain improvement (by visual analogue scale [VAS]), and patient satisfaction (by Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC] scores).
resultsAmong 110 patients, there were no significant differences in the incidence rates of mrADRs by patient characteristics. The mrADRs occurred mainly after the first administration and uptitration period of mirogabalin. EQ-5D-5L scores significantly improved from baseline to week 12 in patients with mrADRs vs those without (difference 0.0767; p = 0.0304 by t test). The proportion of patients with PGIC scores ≤ 3 at week 12 was numerically higher in patients with mrADRs vs those without. There were no differences in the percentage of patients with reduced leg pain by VAS score (improvement ≥ 20 mm) at week 12 by patient characteristics except for spondylolysis/spondylolisthesis as a complication. Baseline SPDQ numbness scores were positively correlated with improvement in EQ-5D-5L at week 12 (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient 0.2811, p = 0.0092).
conclusionsMirogabalin was not related to specific patient characteristics regarding the onset of mrADRs and was effective for LSS regardless of patient characteristics. Caution is needed regarding the onset of mrADRs after first administration and uptitration of mirogabalin, but these may not reduce QOL or patient satisfaction. Patients with high numbness scores may be more likely to benefit from treatment with mirogabalin in terms of QOL.
trial registrationJapan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs021200007).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.