Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT04479787
Other study ID # ABT-CIP-10343
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date July 31, 2020
Est. completion date February 26, 2024

Study information

Verified date May 2024
Source Abbott Medical Devices
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of BurstDR dorsal column stimulation, compared with conventional medical management, in improving pain and back-related physical function in subjects suffering with chronic, refractory axial low back pain with a neuropathic component, who have not had lumbar spine surgery and for whom surgery is not an option.


Description:

A prospective, multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical study with an optional crossover component. The study is designed to evaluate the efficacy of BurstDR SCS in the treatment of chronic axial low back pain with a neuropathic component, compared to conventional medical management (CMM). Subjects will be followed in-clinic at 1,3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months and via phone call or optional clinic visit at 15- and 21-months. The primary endpoint will be assessed at the 6-month follow-up visit. Upon completion of the 6-month follow-up visit, subjects who are dissatisfied with therapy and receiving inadequate improvement with their treatment assignment will be allowed to cross-over to the other treatment arm, if desired. The study will enroll up to 270 patients at up to 30 sites. Subjects will be randomized in a 3:2 fashion to yield approximately 200 evaluable subjects for the primary endpoint analysis.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 270
Est. completion date February 26, 2024
Est. primary completion date August 23, 2022
Accepts healthy volunteers Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: 1. Patient must be willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to any clinical investigation-related procedure. 2. Age = 18 years 3. Patient has chronic (at least 6 months), refractory axial low back pain with a neuropathic component and is not a candidate for spine surgery 4. Patient has back pain for = 6 months inadequately responsive to supervised conservative care 5. Patient has not had spine surgery for back or leg pain 6. Patient is a candidate for spinal cord stimulation 7. Low back pain = 6 on Numerical Rating Scale 8. Oswestry Disability Index score of = 30% 9. Willing and able to comply with the instructions for use, operate the study device, and comply with this Clinical Investigation Plan Exclusion Criteria: 1. Pathology seen on imaging tests obtained within the past 12 months that is clearly identified and is likely the cause of the CLBP, that can be addressed with surgery. 2. Primary complaint of leg pain, or leg pain is greater than back pain 3. Back pain is due to any of the following: - spinal instability defined as > 2 mm translation on radiographic imaging - visceral causes (e.g., endometriosis or fibroids) - vascular causes (e.g., aortic aneurysm) - spinal infection (e.g., osteomyelitis) - inflammation or damage to the spinal cord (e.g. arachnoiditis or syringomyelia) - tumor or spinal metastases 4. Has widespread pain (e.g. fibromyalgia) or pain in other area(s), not intended to be treated in this study (e.g. neck pain, shoulder pain) 5. Patient has seronegative spondyloarthropathy (e.g. rheumatoid, lupus, psoriatic) 6. Neurological deficit (e.g. foot drop) 7. Prior lumbar spine surgery or sacroiliac joint fusion 8. Patient has used a morphine equivalent daily dose of more than 50 MME in the last 30 days 9. Patient is bed bound 10. Patients with regular intake of systemic steroids (except inhaled steroids used to treat asthma) 11. Imaging (MRI, CT, X-ray) findings within the last 12 months that contraindicates lead placement 12. Known allergic reaction to implanted materials 13. Severe scoliotic deformity (>11 degrees in thoracic or lumbar spine) 14. Patient has a history of, or existing intrathecal drug pump 15. Patient has previous experience with neuromodulation devices, including a failed trial 16. BMI > 40 17. Patient is enrolled, or intends to participate, in another clinical drug and/or device study or registry that may interfere with the results of this study, as determined by Abbott personnel 18. Presence of other anatomic or comorbid conditions, or other medical, social, or psychological conditions that, in the investigator's opinion, could limit the subject's ability to participate in the clinical investigation or to comply with follow-up requirements of the clinical investigation results. 19. Failed psychological evaluation 20. Suspicion or evidence of untreated mental illness, or substance abuse 21. Patient demonstrated 2 or more Waddell's signs of nonorganic behavior 22. Patient is in current litigation for back pain/injury, or is currently receiving worker's compensation 23. Pregnant or nursing subjects and those who plan pregnancy during the clinical investigation follow-up period. - Female subjects of child-bearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test done within 7 days prior to enrollment/baseline visit per site standard test.

Study Design


Intervention

Device:
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Utilization of BURSTDR stimulation
Other:
Conventional Medical Management
Assessing type of CMM, location and frequency.

Locations

Country Name City State
United States Albany Medical Center Albany New York
United States Brigham & Women's Hospital Boston Massachusetts
United States Montefiore Medical Center Bronx New York
United States Spanish Hills Interventional Pain Specialists Camarillo California
United States Coastal Pain & Spinal Diagnostics Medical Group Carlsbad California
United States Indiana Spine Group Carmel Indiana
United States Clinical Trials of South Carolina Charleston South Carolina
United States The Spine & Nerve Center of St Francis Hospital Charleston West Virginia
United States Saint Louis Pain Consultants Chesterfield Missouri
United States Chicago Anesthesia Associates Chicago Illinois
United States The Cleveland Clinic Foundation Cleveland Ohio
United States Axis Spine Center Coeur d'Alene Idaho
United States Northshore University Health System Evanston Illinois
United States Center for Interventional Pain & Spine Exton Pennsylvania
United States The Orthopedic Institute Gainesville Florida
United States Connecticut Orthopedic Specialists Hamden Connecticut
United States Advanced Pain Care Henderson Nevada
United States Goodman Campbell Brain & Spine Indianapolis Indiana
United States Kansas University Medical Center Kansas City Kansas
United States Napa Valley Orthopedic Medical Group Napa California
United States Barrow Brain & Spine Phoenix Arizona
United States Summit Spine Portland Oregon
United States Rhode Island Hospital Providence Rhode Island
United States Nevada Advanced Pain Specialists Reno Nevada
United States Mayo Clinic Rochester Minnesota
United States Burkhart Research Institute for Orthopaedics San Antonio Texas
United States Carolina Orthopedics and Neurosurgical Associates Spartanburg South Carolina
United States Anesthesia Pain Care Consultants Tamarac Florida
United States Spinal Diagnostics Tualatin Oregon
United States Banner University Medical Center Tucson Arizona
United States International Spine, Pain & Performance Center Washington District of Columbia

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Abbott Medical Devices

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary The Difference in Responders Between Both Groups Improvement in pain, defined as percentage of patients who report a = 50% decrease on NRS 6 Months
Secondary Measure of Composite Responder Rate Composite Responder rate describes percentage of patients who responded on NRS OR ODI improvements (percentage of patients who report at least =13 change on ODI from baseline OR a = 50% decrease in NRS from baseline) 6 Months
Secondary Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Relative Change From Baseline to 6 Months The numeric rating scale (NRS) is a verbal or written determination of a pain level on a scale from 0 to 10, in which 0 represents no pain and 10 represents excruciating pain (the worst pain imaginable). Lower scores indicate pain reduction. The data is expressed as relative change (%). Baseline to 6 Months
Secondary Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Change From Baseline to 6 Months The Oswestry Disability Index questionnaire will be completed during selected clinical site visits via the electronic data acquisition portal. These questionnaires will be used for the assessment of study endpoints. An interpretation of 0% to 20% means minimal disability;21% to 40% means moderate disability; 41% to 60% means severe disability; 61% to 80% means crippled; and 81%-100% means bed-bound patients. Lower scores indicate less disability. Baseline to 6 Months
Secondary Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) Responder Rate The Pain Catastrophizing Scale questionnaire is a three part question that measures three pain domains:
Rumination (e.g. "I can´t stop thinking about how much it hurts")
Magnification (e.g. "I´m afraid that something serious might happen")
Helplessness (e.g. "There is nothing I can do to reduce the intensity of my pain"). The Pain Catastrophizing Scale questionnaire will be completed during selected clinical site visits via the electronic data acquisition portal. These questionnaires will be used for the assessment of study endpoints. The questionnaire includes 13 statements describing different thoughts and feelings that may be associated with pain. Using the scale 0-4 (0- not at all; 1- to a slight degree; 2- to a moderate degree; 3- to a great degree; and 4- all the time), the patients are expected to indicate the degree to which they have these thoughts and feelings when they're experiencing pain. Lower scores indicate less catastrophizing thoughts.
6 Months
Secondary Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Responder Rate PGIC is a 7 point scale depicting a patient's rating of overall improvement. Patients rate their change as "very much improved," "much improved," "minimally improved," "no change," "minimally worse," "much worse," or "very much worse." The percentage of patients who reported "very much improved," or "much improved," are presented. 6 Months
Secondary Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) Pain Interference Relative Change From Baseline to 6 Months The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29-item short-form health-reported quality of life measures (PROMIS-29) were administered. The transformed score (T-score) for the pain interference domain was used, where 50 (10) is the mean (standard deviation) of a relevant reference population. Higher scores equals more of the concept being measured (i.e., worse outcome). Pain Interferences: Normal: <55; Mild: 55 - 60; Moderate: 60 -70; and Severe: >70. Baseline to 6 Months
Secondary Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) Physical Function Relative Change From Baseline to 6 Months The PROMIS-29 physical function sub-scale includes 4 questions. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29-item short-form health-reported quality of life measures (PROMIS-29) were administered. The transformed score (T-score) for the physical function domain was used, where 50 (10) is the mean (standard deviation) of a relevant reference population. Higher scores equals more of the concept being measured (i.e., better outcome). Physical function- Normal: >45; Mild: 40 - 45; Moderate: 30 - 40; and Severe: >30. Baseline to 6 Months
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Recruiting NCT04699734 - Peripheral Nerve Block in Patients With Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy N/A
Recruiting NCT06019325 - Rhomboid Intercostal Plane Block on Chronic Pain Incidence and Acute Pain Scores After Mastectomy N/A
Completed NCT05235191 - Effectiveness and Safety of Methadone Versus Placebo for the Control of Neuropathic Pain in Different Etiologies Phase 3
Completed NCT05845177 - Persistent Pain After Hip Replacement
Completed NCT05496205 - A SAD Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability and PK/PD of iN1011-N17 in Healthy Volunteers Phase 1
Not yet recruiting NCT05949554 - Electroencephalographic (EEG) Profils for Patients on Intravenous Ketamine.
Withdrawn NCT05052645 - Ear Acupuncture for Neuropathic Pain N/A
Completed NCT02930551 - Neuromas as the Cause of Pain N/A
Completed NCT02824588 - Working Memory Training for Chronic Neuropathic and Fibromyalgia Pain N/A
Completed NCT02866396 - Impact of Pregabalin in Chronic Users vs. a Perioperative Limited Prescription on Oxycodone Requirement
Active, not recruiting NCT02560545 - Cannabinoids Effects on the Pain Modulation System N/A
Enrolling by invitation NCT02485795 - Observational Study of the Impact of Genetic Testing on Healthcare Decisions and Care in Interventional Pain Management N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT02246517 - The Effect of N2O on Chronic Neuropathic Pain Patients Phase 0
Completed NCT02099890 - The Effect of Diet on Chronic Inflammation and Related Disorders Following Spinal Cord Injury Phase 3
Completed NCT01946555 - Prospective Longitudinal Observational Study to Evaluate the Clinical Characteristics and Opioids Treatments in Patients With Breakthrough Cancer Pain N/A
Completed NCT01884662 - Virtual Walking for Neuropathic Pain in Spinal Cord Injury N/A
Completed NCT01718821 - Assessments on Current Pain Managements in Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients N/A
Completed NCT01669967 - The Role of Intravenous (IV) Lidocaine in the Management of Chronic Neuropathic Pain of Peripheral Nerve Origin N/A
Completed NCT01207596 - Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Extended Release Hydromorphone (Exalgo) in Patients With Neuropathic Pain Phase 4
Completed NCT01201317 - A Study to Investigate the Analgesic Efficacy of AZD2423 Compared With Placebo After 28 Days Treatment in Patients With Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy Phase 2