A Safety and Efficacy Study of AGN-214868 in Patients With Postherpetic Neuralgia

• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01678924
• Recruitment Status: Terminated
• First Posted: September 5, 2012
• Results First Posted: January 7, 2020
• Last Update Posted: January 7, 2020
• Sponsor: Allergan
• Information provided by (Responsible Party): Allergan

Study Description

Brief Summary:

This is a safety and efficacy study of AGN-214868 in patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN).

Condition or disease	Intervention/treatment	Phase
Neuralgia, Postherpetic	Drug: AGN-214868; Drug: AGN-214868 Placebo (Vehicle)	Phase 2

Study Design

• Study Type: Interventional (Clinical Trial)
• Actual Enrollment: 280 participants
• Allocation: Randomized
• Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Double (Participant, Investigator)
• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Study Start Date: January 2013
• Actual Primary Completion Date: May 2015
• Actual Study Completion Date: September 2015

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/treatment
Experimental: AGN-214868 Dose 1; AGN-214868 Dose 1 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.	Drug: AGN-214868; AGN-214868 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.
Experimental: AGN-214868 Dose 2; AGN-214868 Dose 2 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.	Drug: AGN-214868; AGN-214868 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.
Placebo Comparator: AGN-214868 Placebo (Vehicle); AGN-214868 placebo (vehicle) given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.	Drug: AGN-214868 Placebo (Vehicle); AGN-214868 placebo (vehicle) given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.
Experimental: AGN-214868 Dose 3; AGN-214868 Dose 3 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.	Drug: AGN-214868; AGN-214868 given as injections into the area of pain on Day 1.

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures :

1. Change From Baseline in Average Pain Intensity Score - Cohort 1 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
   The average pain intensity score at each week was the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores reported in the patient's eDiary during each 7-day period, starting with the day of study treatment injection. Patients used the 11-point Likert scale, with anchors at 0 = "no pain" and 10 = "pain as bad as you can imagine" Baseline was defined as the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores reported during the baseline period for the 7 days immediately prior to the treatment.
2. Change From Baseline in Average Pain Intensity Score - Cohort 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
   The average pain intensity score at each week was the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores reported in the patient's eDiary during each 7-day period, starting with the day of study treatment injection. patients used the 11-point Likert scale, with anchors at 0 = "no pain" and 10 = "pain as bad as you can imagine" Baseline was defined as the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores reported during the baseline period for the 7 days immediately prior to the treatment.

Secondary Outcome Measures :

1. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 1 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 1 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
2. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
3. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 3 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 3 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
4. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease), and in 10% increments, up to 100% improvement, in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
5. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 5 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 5 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
6. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 6 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 6 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
7. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 7 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 7 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
8. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
9. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 9 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 9 ]
   Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
10. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 10 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 10 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
11. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 11 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 11 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
12. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 1 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
13. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 1 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 1 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
14. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
15. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 3 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 3 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
16. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
17. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 5 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 5 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
18. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 6 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 6 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
19. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 7 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 7 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
20. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
21. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 9 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 9 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
22. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 10 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 10 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
23. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 11 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 11 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
24. Percentage of Average Pain Intensity Score Responders - Cohort 2 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    Average Pain Intensity Score Responder is defined as a patient who had at least a 30% improvement (decrease) in average pain intensity score at each week compared with baseline
25. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 1 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient and that the patient was asked to circle their MASP on with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
26. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 1 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
27. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 1 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
28. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 1 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
29. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 2 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
30. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 2 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
31. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 2 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
32. Change From Baseline in Maximal Area of Spontaneous Pain - Cohort 2 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of spontaneous pain (MASP) was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their MASP with a black marker. Areas of pain were quantified at a central reading center.
33. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 1 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
34. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 1 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
35. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 1 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
36. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 1 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
37. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
38. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
39. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
40. Change From Baseline in Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    The assessment of maximal area of allodynia was conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). This assessment is based on color photographs taken of the patient in which the patient was asked to outline their maximal area of skin that feels unpleasant to the touch (allodynic skin) with a red marker. Areas of allodynia were quantified at a central reading center.
41. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia Cohort 1 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
42. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia Cohort 1 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
43. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia Cohort 1 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
44. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia Cohort 1 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
45. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 2 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 2 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
46. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 4 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 4 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
47. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 8 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 8 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.
48. Change From Baseline in Evoked Pain Score in the Area of Allodynia - Cohort 2 - Week 12 [ Time Frame: Baseline to Week 12 ]
    Assessment of evoked pain were conducted by a qualified and trained investigator or designee (eg, physician, physician's assistant, nurse practitioner, and nurse). Evoked pain was scored using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0 to100 mm scale with anchors of 0 = No pain and 100 = Worst pain imaginable). The patient was asked to use the VAS to rate the unpleasantness of 3 brush strokes within the center of the area of allodynia and pain.

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 Years to 80 Years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Sexes Eligible for Study: All
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

• Postherpetic neuralgia with pain present for at least 9 months

Exclusion Criteria:

• Active herpes zoster skin rash
• Anticipated treatment for postherpetic neuralgia during the first 3 months of the study, including oral and topical medications, acupuncture, spinal cord stimulation, transcutaneous nerve stimulation (TNS), or trigger point injection
• Anticipated treatment with pain medication for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia during the first 3 months of the study
• Use of capsaicin treatment for postherpetic neuralgia within 6 months, or anticipated use during the first 3 months of the study
• Use of botulinum toxin of any serotype for any reason within 6 months, or anticipated use during the study

Contacts and Locations

Locations

United States, Arizona

Agave Clinical Research, LLC

Mesa, Arizona, United States, 85202

Territory Neurology & Research Institute

Tucson, Arizona, United States, 85704

United States, California

Neuro-Pain Medical Center

Fresno, California, United States, 93710

University of California, Irvine

Irvine, California, United States, 92697

Loma Linda University

Loma Linda, California, United States, 92354

Northern California Research Corp

Sacramento, California, United States, 95821

Neurological Research Institute

Santa Monica, California, United States, 90404

United States, Colorado

Alpine Clinical Research Center

Boulder, Colorado, United States, 80301

The Mile High Research Center

Denver, Colorado, United States, 80218

United States, Florida

Riverside Clinical Research

Edgewater, Florida, United States, 32132

Compass Research, LLC

Orlando, Florida, United States, 32806

United States, Georgia

Drug Studies America

Marietta, Georgia, United States, 30060

United States, Idaho

Injury Care Research, LLC

Boise, Idaho, United States, 83713

United States, Illinois

Millennium Pain Center

Bloomington, Illinois, United States, 61701

United States, Massachusetts

Beacon Clinical Research

Brockton, Massachusetts, United States, 02301

Springfield Neurology Associates, LLC

Springfield, Massachusetts, United States, 01104

United States, Michigan

Michigan Head Pain and Neurology Institute

Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States, 48104

Quest Research Institute

Farmington Hills, Michigan, United States, 48334

United States, Missouri

Center for Pharmaceutical Research

Kansas City, Missouri, United States, 64114

Clinvest Headache Care Center

Springfield, Missouri, United States, 65807

United States, New Mexico

Albuquerque Neuroscience, Inc.

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States, 87109

United States, New York

The Medical Research Network, LLC

New York, New York, United States, 10128

Island Neurological Associates, P.C.

Plainview, New York, United States, 11803-4491

United States, North Carolina

Wake Research Associates

Raleigh, North Carolina, United States, 27612

United States, North Dakota

Plains Medical Clinic

Fargo, North Dakota, United States, 58104

United States, Oklahoma

COR Clinical Research, LLC

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States, 73103

United States, Pennsylvania

Allegheny Pain Management

Altoona, Pennsylvania, United States, 16602

United States, Rhode Island

Omega Medical Research

Warwick, Rhode Island, United States, 02886

United States, South Carolina

Clinical Trials of South Carolina, LLC

Charleston, South Carolina, United States, 29406

PharmaCorp Clinical Trials, Inc

Charleston, South Carolina, United States, 29412

Clinical Research of Charleston

Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, United States, 29464

United States, Texas

Center for Clinical Studies

Webster, Texas, United States, 77598

United States, Washington

MultiCare Neuroscience Center of Washington

Tacoma, Washington, United States, 98405

Austria

SMZ-Ost Donauspital

Vienna, Austria, A-1220

AKH Wien

Wien, Austria, 1090

Wilhelminenspital der Stadt Wien

Wien, Austria, 1160

Germany

Pro scientia med im MARE Klinikum

Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany, 24119

Berlin Research Centre

Berlin, Germany, 12627

Regionales Schmerzzentrum DGS

Bielefeld, Germany, 33602

Bochum Research Centre

Bochum, Germany, 44787

Das Schmerzzentrum Celle

Celle, Germany, 29221

Ambulant study centre

Cologne, Germany, 50935

Leiter des Universitats Schmerz Centrums (USC)

Dresden, Germany, 01307

Neuro-Consil GmbH

Düsseldorf, Germany, D-40212

Frankfurt Research Centre

Frankfurt, Germany, 60596

Schmerz und Palliativzentrum Fulda

Fulda, Germany, 36039

Schmerz und Palliativ- Zentrum Goeppingen

Goeppingen, Germany, 73033

Klinikum Hanau GmbH

Hanau, Germany, 63450

Neurologische Praxis Heidenheim

Heidenheim, Germany, 89518

Facharzt fur Neurologie

Hoppegarten, Germany, 15366

Schmerzklinik Kiel

Kiel, Germany, 24149

Medamed GmbH

Leipzig, Germany, 04109

Leipzig Research Centre

Leipzig, Germany, D-04103

Magdeburg Research Centre

Magdeburg, Germany, 39104

Regionales Schmerz- und Palliativ Zentrum DGS Mainz

Mainz, Germany, 55116

Universitätsklinik Ulm

Ulm, Germany, 89081

Schmerztherapiezentrum Villingen-Schwenningen

Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany, D-78052

Poland

Poznański Ośrodek Medyczny NOVAMED

Poznan, Poznañ, Poland, 60-773

Medica Pro Familia Sp. Z.o.o SKA

Gdynia, Poland, 81338

Medica Pro Familia Sp. Z.o.o SKA

Katowice, Poland, 40-954

Malopolskie Centrum Medyczne S.C.

Krakow, Poland, 30-510

Specjalistyczny Gabinet Neurologiczny

Krakow, Poland, 30-539

Nzoz Neuromed

Lublin, Poland, 20-064

NZOZ Neuro-Kard

Poznan, Poland, 61-853

Niepubliczny Zaklad Opieki Zdrowotnej

Swidnik, Poland, 21-040

Osrodek Badan Klinicznych Euromedis Sp. z o.o.

Szczecin, Poland, 70-111

Przychodnia Specjalistyczna PROSEN

Warszawa, Poland, 01-231

Medica Pro Familia Warszawa

Warszawa, Poland, 01-868

Synexus SCM sp. z o.o.

Wroclaw, Poland, 50-088

Sponsors and Collaborators

Allergan

Investigators

• Study Director: Medical Director; Allergan

More Information

• Responsible Party: Allergan
• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01678924
• Other Study ID Numbers: 214868-007; 2012-002240-24 ( EudraCT Number )
• First Posted: September 5, 2012
• Results First Posted: January 7, 2020
• Last Update Posted: January 7, 2020
• Last Verified: December 2019

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Neuralgia; Neuralgia, Postherpetic; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Neuromuscular Diseases; Nervous System Diseases; Pain; Neurologic Manifestations; Signs and Symptoms