Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00695565

Efficacy and Safety Study of ARC-4558 for Management of Pain Associated With Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

The purpose of this study is to determine whether ARC-4558 is effective in managing pain associated with painful diabetic neuropathy.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 2

Primary location

University of Alabama at Birmingham, School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Loading trial locations.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • has Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus
  • has a history of chronic pain attributable to a symmetrical stocking distribution neuropathy in the lower extremities for a duration of at least six months but less than or equal to five years prior to Screening

Exclusion criteria

  • has neuropathy secondary to non-diabetic causes
  • has a significant neurological disorder or a condition that can cause symptoms that mimic peripheral neuropathy or might confound assessment of PDN
  • has other chronic pain with intensity at or greater than the bilateral pain in the feet/toes
  • is using an implanted medical device (eg, spinal cord stimulator, intrathecal pump, or peripheral nerve stimulator) for the treatment of pain
  • is pregnant or lactating

Treatment and study plan

Placebo Gel

Drug

TID x 12 weeks

Clonidine Topical Gel (ARC-4558)

Drug

TID x 12 weeks

Primary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Average Daily Pain NPRS (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) Score; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline (average of Days -7 to -1) and Week 12 (Average of Days 78 to 84)

    Pain in the feet was scored daily at bedtime by the subject on a 0-10 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) through Day 84. Subjects were asked to record average pain in the feet over the past 24 hours. A score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 was "worst possible pain".

    The change in pain is represented as Week 12 minus Baseline, so greater negative numbers represent more improvement (more pain relief).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline in Average Daily Pain NPRS Score for Each Week of Treatment; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline (average of Days -7 to -1) and Weeks 1 through 12 (weekly averages)

    Pain in the feet was scored daily at bedtime by the subject on a 0-10 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). Subjects were asked to record average pain in the feet over the past 24 hours. A score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 was "worst possible pain". A weekly average was calculated from the daily scores for each week. The change in pain is represented as the average weekly score minus Baseline, so greater negative numbers represent more improvement (more pain relief).

  2. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Worst Daily Pain NPRS Score; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline (average of Days -7 to -1) and Week 12 (average of Days 78 to 84)

    Pain in the feet was scored daily at bedtime by the subject on a 0-10 numeric pain rating scale. Subjects were asked to record the worst pain in their feet over the past 24 hours. A score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 was "worst possible pain". The change in pain is represented as Week 12 minus Baseline, so greater negative numbers represent greater improvement (greater pain relief).

  3. Percentage of Subjects Who Experience at Least 30% Reduction in Average Daily Pain From Baseline; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline (average of Days -7 to -1) and Week 12 (average of Days 78 to 84)

    Pain in the feet was scored daily at bedtime by the subject on a 0-10 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). Subjects were asked to record average pain in the feet over the past 24 hours. A score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 was "worst possible pain".

  4. Percentage of Subjects Who Experience at Least 50% Reduction in Average Daily Pain From Baseline; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline (average of Days -7 to -1) and Week 12 (average of Days 78 to 84)

    Pain in the feet was scored daily at bedtime by the subject on a 0-10 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). Subjects were asked to record average pain in the feet over the past 24 hours. A score of 0 indicated "no pain" and a score of 10 was "worst possible pain".

  5. Change From Baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Severity Scale at Week 12; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    The Brief Pain Inventory was completed by the subject at clinic visits. The Severity Scale (of 0 to 40) is a composite score, which is the sum of the individual ratings for worst pain, least pain, average pain, and current pain. Each individual question is rated on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "No Pain" and 10 indicates "Pain as bad as you can imagine". The change in pain severity is represented as Week 12 minus Baseline, so greater negative numbers represent greater improvement (pain relief).

  6. Change From Baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory Functional Interference Scale at Week 12; mLOCF Imputation

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    The Brief Pain Inventory was completed by the subject at clinic visits. The Functional Interference Scale (of 0 to 70) is a composite score that measures the degree to which pain interferes with mood, walking, work, relationships, sleep, general activity, and enjoyment of life. The composite score is a sum of the seven individual question scores. Each individual question is rated in reference to pain over the past 24 hours on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 indicates that pain "does not interfere" and 10 indicates that pain "completely interferes" with that function, so lower scores represent better outcomes on this scale.

    The change in functional interference is represented as Week 12 minus Baseline, so greater negative numbers represent more improvement.

  7. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Overall Quality of Sleep (Chronic Pain Sleep Inventory)

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    Subjects rated overall quality of sleep over the past week using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) where 100=Excellent and 0=Very Poor. This scale was completed during clinic visits. Change from Baseline is a positive value where quality of sleep improved.

  8. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Depression Score of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    The HADS was completed at the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits. The Depression Score component of the HADS includes 7 questions, each with 4 possible answer choices (rated 0 to 3). The composite score is created by adding the scores of the 7 individual questions. A score of 0 to 7 is Normal, 8-10 indicates Mild Depression, 11-14 indicates Moderate Depression, and 15-21 indicates Severe Depression. The change from Baseline is calculated as the Week 12 composite score minus the Baseline composite score.

  9. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Anxiety Score of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    The HADS was completed at the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits. The Anxiety Score component of the HADS includes 7 questions, each with 4 possible answer choices (rated 0 to 3). The composite score is created by adding the scores of the 7 individual questions. A score of 0 to 7 is Normal, 8-10 indicates Mild Anxiety, 11-14 indicates Moderate Anxiety, and 15-21 indicates Severe Anxiety. The change from Baseline is calculated as the Week 12 composite score minus the Baseline composite score.

  10. Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the McGill Pain Questionnaire (Short Form) Total Score

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    The McGill Pain Questionnaire asks subjects to rate 15 different kinds of pain, each on a scale of 0 to 3 (0=None, 1=Mild, 2=Moderate, 3=Severe). The total score is a sum of the individual ratings and has a range from 0 to 45, where higher numbers indicate more pain. The 15 types of pain assessed are throbbing, shooting, stabbing, sharp, cramping, gnawing, hot-burning, aching, heavy, tender, splitting, tiring-exhausting, sickening, fearful, and punishing-cruel. This scale was completed at the Baseline and Week 12 clinic visits. The change from Baseline is calculated as the Week 12 total score minus the Baseline total score, so greater negative numbers indicate more improvement (pain relief).

  11. Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    At Week 12 the subject was asked to rate their total improvement relative to Baseline, whether or not, in their judgement, it was due entirely to study drug treatment or not. Answer choices were: (+3) very much improved, (+2) much improved, (+1) minimally improved, (0) no change, (-1) minimally worse, (-2) much worse, (-3) very much worse.

  12. Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGIC) at Week 12

    Time frame: Week 12

    At Week 12, the Investigator was asked to independently rate the subject's total improvement relative to Baseline, whether or not, in their judgement, it was due entirely to study drug treatment or not. Answer choices were: (+3) very much improved, (+2) much improved, (+1) minimally improved, (0) no change, (-1) minimally worse, (-2) much worse, (-3) very much worse.

  13. Change in Blood Pressure From Baseline to Week 12

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 12

    Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure were measured at clinic visits. This outcome assesses the change in blood pressure from Baseline to Week 12 of treatment.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Arcion Therapeutics Inc

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Clonidine Topical Gel, 0.1% With Placebo in the Management of Pain Associated With Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Important dates

Study start
2008
Primary completion
2009
Study completion
2010
First posted
Jun 12, 2008
Registry last updated
Nov 8, 2016

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.