Study of the analgesic effect of lanepitant in patients with osteoarthritis pain

Citation
Dj. Goldstein et al., Study of the analgesic effect of lanepitant in patients with osteoarthritis pain, CLIN PHARM, 67(4), 2000, pp. 419-426
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Pharmacology,"Pharmacology & Toxicology
Journal title
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
ISSN journal
00099236 → ACNP
Volume
67
Issue
4
Year of publication
2000
Pages
419 - 426
Database
ISI
SICI code
0009-9236(200004)67:4<419:SOTAEO>2.0.ZU;2-N
Abstract
Objective: Lanepitant selectively blocks substance P binding to the neuroki nin-l receptor, preventing neurogenic inflammation and pain transmission. S ubstance P is present in synovial fluid and in excess in cerebral spinal fl uid. We investigated the effect of lanepitant on pain caused by osteoarthri tis to evaluate the role of neurokinin-1 blockade. Methods: Outpatients (n = 214) with moderate to severe lower-limb osteoarth ritis pain were treated for 3 weeks in a parallel, randomized double-blind study with initial doses of 20, 60, 200, or 600 mg lanepitant, 375 mg napro xen, or placebo, followed by 10, 30, 100, or 300 mg lanepitant twice a day, 375 mg naproxen twice a day, or placebo twice a day in the multiple-dose p eriod. Pain intensity, pain relief, patient global impression, and adjuncti ve analgesic use were compared across treatments. Safety was evaluated with adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory assessments. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy or s afety across treatments for the initial dose assessment. After 1 week of th erapy naproxen was statistically significantly (P < .05) better than placeb o and lanepitant in reducing average pain. During the second and third week s of therapy patients receiving naproxen continued to have statistically si gnificantly (P < .05) less pain than those receiving placebo or lanepitant despite using significantly less adjunctive analgesic medication. There wer e no statistically significant differences in rates of discontinuation acro ss treatments. Lanepitant treatment was associated with diarrhea, whereas n aproxen treatment was associated with gastric discomfort. There were no cli nically relevant changes in vital signs or laboratory analytes for any of t he treatments. Conclusion: Lanepitant was ineffective in relieving osteoarthritis pain, po ssibly because neurokinin-l binding of substance P does not play a signific ant role in osteoarthritis pain or because lanepitant fails to adequately p enetrate the blood-brain barrier to affect central pain perception.