Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Gabapentin”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Efficacy of gabapentin in migraine prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare gabapentin with placebo for use as a prophylactic agent in patients with migraine (with or without aura). STUDY DESIGN AND TREATMENT: After screening, a 4-week, single-blind, placebo baseline period was followed by a 12-week, double-blind, treatment period. The 12-week treatment period consisted of a 4-week titration phase and an 8-week stable-dosing phase. During the 4-week titration phase, patients were started on one 300-mg capsule of gabapentin or matching placebo. Patients were titrated weekly from 900 mg/day (end of week 1) to 2400 mg/day (end of week 4) and had to be receiving a stable dose of study medication by the end of the titration period. Study medication was to be given on a three-times-a-day dosing regimen. METHODS: The study hypothesis was defined a priori as a lower 4-week migraine rate during the second stabilization period for the gabapentin-treated patients as compared with the placebo-treated patients. The analyses were performed with the 4-week migraine rate at baseline as a covariate and center as a blocking factor. RESULTS: At seven participating centers, 143 patients with migraine were randomized in a 2:1 ratio and received either gabapentin (n = 98) or matching placebo (n = 45). Thirty-three patients (24.1%) discontinued prematurely from the study, including 24 (24.5%) of 98 gabapentin-treated patients and 9 (20.0%) of 45 placebo-treated patients; the majority of patients discontinued due to adverse events (16 [16.3%] of 98 gabapentin-treated patients; 4 [8.9%] of 45 placebo-treated patients). Patients included in the analysis were evenly balanced for age, sex, race, weight, and height. The majority of these patients were white (80 [92.0%] of 87) and women (72 [82.8%] of 87), with a mean age of approximately 39.4 years and a history of migraine episodes for a mean of about 21 years. At the end of the 12-week treatment phase, the median 4-week migraine rate was 2.7 for the gabapentin-treated patients maintained on a stable dose of 2400 mg/day and 3.5 for the placebo-treated patients (P =.006), compared with 4.2 and 4.1, respectively, during the baseline period. Additionally, 26 (46.4%) of 56 patients receiving a stable dose of 2400 mg/day gabapentin and 5 (16.1%) of 31 patients receiving placebo showed at least a 50% reduction in the 4-week migraine rate (P =.008). The average number of days per 4 weeks with migraine was also statistically significant and favored gabapentin (P =.006) during stabilization period 2. The median change in 4-week headache rate was statistically significant as well (P =.013). The most frequently reported adverse events for both treatment groups were asthenia, dizziness, somnolence, and infection. Adverse events determined by the investigator to be associated with study drug resulted in patient withdrawal in 13 (13.3%) of 98 gabapentin-treated patients and 3 (6.7%) of 45 placebo-treated patients. Somnolence and dizziness accounted for many of the premature withdrawals among those taking gabapentin. CONCLUSION: Gabapentin is an effective prophylactic agent for patients with migraine. In addition, gabapentin appears generally well tolerated with mild to moderate somnolence and dizziness.

Acetates↗
PubMed2005

Morphine, gabapentin, or their combination for neuropathic pain.

BACKGROUND: The available drugs to treat neuropathic pain have incomplete efficacy and dose-limiting adverse effects. We compared the efficacy of a combination of gabapentin and morphine with that of each as a single agent in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy or postherpetic neuralgia. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, active placebo-controlled, four-period crossover trial, patients received daily active placebo (lorazepam), sustained-release morphine, gabapentin, and a combination of gabapentin and morphine--each given orally for five weeks. The primary outcome measure was mean daily pain intensity in patients receiving a maximal tolerated dose; secondary outcomes included pain (rated according to the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire), adverse effects, maximal tolerated doses, mood, and quality of life. RESULTS: Of 57 patients who underwent randomization (35 with diabetic neuropathy and 22 with postherpetic neuralgia), 41 completed the trial. Mean daily pain (on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher numbers indicating more severe pain) at a maximal tolerated dose of the study drug was as follows: 5.72 at baseline, 4.49 with placebo, 4.15 with gabapentin, 3.70 with morphine, and 3.06 with the gabapentin-morphine combination (P<0.05 for the combination vs. placebo, gabapentin, and morphine). Total scores on the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (on a scale from 0 to 45, with higher numbers indicating more severe pain) at a maximal tolerated dose were 14.4 with placebo, 10.7 with gabapentin, 10.7 with morphine, and 7.5 with the gabapentin-morphine combination (P<0.05 for the combination vs. placebo, gabapentin, and morphine). The maximal tolerated doses of morphine and gabapentin were lower (P<0.05) with the combination than for each drug as single agent. At the maximal tolerated dose, the gabapentin-morphine combination resulted in a higher frequency of constipation than gabapentin alone (P<0.05) and a higher frequency of dry mouth than morphine alone (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentin and morphine combined achieved better analgesia at lower doses of each drug than either as a single agent, with constipation, sedation, and dry mouth as the most frequent adverse effects.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Comparison of the autoradiographic binding distribution of [3H]-gabapentin with excitatory amino acid receptor and amino acid uptake site distributions in rat brain.

1. Gabapentin is a novel anticonvulsant with an unknown mechanism of action. Recent homogenate binding studies with [3H]-gabapentin have suggested a structure-activity relationship similar to that shown for the amino acid transport system responsible for the uptake of large neutral amino acids (LNAA). 2. The autoradiographic binding distribution of [3H]-gabapentin in rat brain was compared with the distributions for excitatory amino acid receptor subtypes and the uptake sites for excitatory and large neutral amino acids in consecutive rat brain sections. 3. Densitometric measurement of the autoradiographic images followed by normalisation with respect to the hippocampus CA1 stratum radiatum, was carried out before comparison of each binding distribution with that of [3H]-gabapentin by linear regression analysis. The correlation coefficients observed showed no absolute correlation was observed between the binding distributions of [3H]-gabapentin and those of the excitatory amino acid receptor subtypes. The acidic and large neutral amino acid uptake site distributions demonstrated a much closer correlation to the [3H]-gabapentin binding site distribution. The correlation coefficients for D-[3H]-aspartate, L-[3H]-leucine and L-[3H]-isoleucine binding site distributions were 0.76, 0.90 and 0.88 respectively. 4. Concentration-dependent inhibition by unlabelled gabapentin of autoradiographic binding of L-[3H]-leucine and L-[3H]-isoleucine was observed, with non-specific binding levels being reached at concentrations between 10 and 100 microM. 5. Excitotoxic quinolinic acid lesion studies in rat brain caudate putamen and autoradiography were carried out for the amino acid uptake sites mentioned above. The resulting glial infiltration of the lesioned areas was visualized by autoradiography using the peripheral benzodiazepine receptor specific ligand [3H]-PK11195. A significant decrease in binding density in the lesioned area compared with sham-operated animals was observed for D-[3H]-aspartate, L-[3H]-leucine, L-[3H]-isoleucine and [3H]-gabapentin, whilst [3H]-PK11195 showed a significant increase in binding density indicative of glial infiltration into the lesioned area. These results suggest that the gabapentin binding site and the acidic and LNAA uptake site may be present on cell bodies of a neuronal population of cells. 6. From these studies it appears that [3H]-gabapentin, L-[3H]-leucine and L-[3H]-isoleucine bind to the same site in rat brain. The inhibition of [3H]-gabapentin binding by the LNAA uptake system-specific ligand, BCH, suggests that [3H]-gabapentin may label this uptake site, termed system-L. Conversely these ligands could be labelling a novel site that coincidentally has a similar structure-activity relationship to this uptake site. These results suggest a novel mechanistically relevant site of action for gabapentin and may enable further anti-epileptic agents of this type to be developed.

Acetates↗
PubMed1997

Mechanisms of action of gabapentin.

The chemical structure of gabapentin (Neurontin) is derived by addition of a cyclohexyl group to the backbone of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA). Gabapentin prevents seizures in a wide variety of models in animals, including generalized tonic-clonic and partial seizures. Gabapentin has no activity at GABAA or GABAB receptors of GABA uptake carriers of brain. Gabapentin interacts with a high-affinity binding site in brain membranes, which has recently been identified as an auxiliary subunit of voltage-sensitive Ca2+ channels. However, the functional correlate of gabapentin binding is unclear and remains under study. Gabapentin crosses several lipid membrane barriers via system L amino acid transporters. In vitro, gabapentin modulates the action of the GABA synthetic enzyme, glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) and the glutamate synthesizing enzyme, branched-chain amino acid transaminase. Results with human and rat brain NMR spectroscopy indicate that gabapentin increases GABA synthesis. Gabapentin increases non-synaptic GABA responses from neuronal tissues in vitro. In vitro, gabapentin reduces the release of several mono-amine neurotransmitters. Gabapentin prevents pain responses in several animal models of hyperalgesia and prevents neuronal death in vitro and in vivo with models of the neurodegenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Gabapentin is also active in models that detect anxiolytic activity. Although gabapentin may have several different pharmacological actions, it appears that modulation of GABA synthesis and glutamate synthesis may be important.

Acetates↗
PubMed2003

Gabapentin actions on Kir3 currents and N-type Ca2+ channels via GABAB receptors in hippocampal pyramidal cells.

Gabapentin is a clinically effective anticonvulsant with an unclear mechanism of action. It was described as a GABA(B(1a,2)) receptor subtype-selective agonist, activating postsynaptic K(+) currents and inhibiting postsynaptic Ca(2+) channels in CA1 pyramidal cells, but without presynaptic actions. These activities appeared controversial and we therefore sought to further clarify gabapentin actions in rat hippocampal slices by characterizing K(+) currents and Ca(2+) channels targeted by gabapentin using whole-cell recording and multiphoton Ca(2+) imaging. 1) We found that gabapentin and baclofen induced inwardly rectifying K(+) currents (K(Gbp) and K(Bac), respectively), sensitive to Ba(2+) and Cs(+). 2) A constitutively active K(IR) current, independent of GABA(B) receptor activation and sensitive to Ba(2+) and Cs(+) was also present. 3) K(Gbp), K(Bac), and K(IR) currents showed some differences in sensitivity to Ba(2+) and Cs(+), indicating the possible activation of distinct Kir3 currents, independent of K(IR), by gabapentin and baclofen. 4) Gabapentin inhibition of Ca(2+) channels was abolished by omega-conotoxin GVIA, but not by omega-agatoxin IVA and nimodipine, indicating a predominant action of gabapentin on N-type Ca(2+) channels. 5) Gabapentin actions were linked to activation of pertussis toxin-sensitive G-proteins since N-ethylmaleimide (NEM) blocked K(Gbp) activation and Ca(2+) channel inhibition by gabapentin. 6) Finally, gabapentin reduced epileptiform discharges in slices via GABA(B) receptor activation. The anticonvulsant actions of gabapentin in hippocampal cells may thus involve GABA(B) receptor coupling to G-proteins and modulation of Kir3 and N-type Ca(2+) channels. Moreover, gabapentin and baclofen activation of GABA(B) receptors may couple to distinct cellular targets.

Acetates↗
PubMed2006

Gabapentin increases a tonic inhibitory conductance in hippocampal pyramidal neurons.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms underlying the therapeutic actions of gabapentin remain poorly understood. The chemical structure and behavioral properties of gabapentin strongly suggest actions on inhibitory neurotransmission mediated by gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA); however, gabapentin does not directly modulate GABAA or GABAB receptors. Two distinct forms of GABAergic inhibition occur in the brain: postsynaptic conductance and a persistent tonic inhibitory conductance primarily generated by extrasynaptic GABAA receptors. The aim of this study was to determine whether gabapentin increased the tonic conductance in hippocampal neurons in vitro. As a positive control, the effects of vigabatrin, which irreversibly inhibits GABA transaminase, were also examined. METHODS: GABAA receptors in hippocampal neurons from embryonic mice were studied using whole cell patch clamp recordings. Miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents and the tonic current were recorded from cultured neurons that were treated for 36-48 h with gabapentin, vigabatrin, or gabapentin and vigabatrin. To determine whether gabapentin increased the expression of GABAA receptors, Western blots were stained with antibodies selective for alpha1, alpha2, and alpha5 subunits. RESULTS: GABAA receptors were insensitive to the acute application of gabapentin, whereas chronic treatment increased the amplitude of the tonic current threefold (EC50 = 209 microm) but did not influence miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents. Vigabatrin increased the tonic conductance, and the maximally effective concentration did not occlude the actions of gabapentin, which suggests that these compounds act by different mechanisms. Neither gabapentin nor vigabatrin increased the expression of GABAA receptors in the neurons. CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentin increases a tonic inhibitory conductance in mammalian neurons. High-affinity GABAA receptors that generate the tonic conductance may detect small increases in the ambient concentration of neurotransmitter caused by gabapentin.

4-Aminobutyrate Transaminase↗
PubMed1998

Gabapentin for the symptomatic treatment of painful neuropathy in patients with diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Pain is the most disturbing symptom of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. As many as 45% of patients with diabetes mellitus develop peripheral neuropathies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of gabapentin monotherapy on pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 8-week trial conducted between July 1996 and March 1997. SETTING: Outpatient clinics at 20 sites. PATIENTS: The 165 patients enrolled had a 1- to 5-year history of pain attributed to diabetic neuropathy and a minimum 40-mm pain score on the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire visual analogue scale. INTERVENTION: Gabapentin (titrated from 900 to 3600 mg/d or maximum tolerated dosage) or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy measure was daily pain severity as measured on an 11-point Likert scale (0, no pain; 10, worst possible pain). Secondary measures included sleep interference scores, the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire scores, Patient Global Impression of Change and Clinical Global Impression of Change, the Short Form-36 Quality of Life Questionnaire scores, and the Profile of Mood States results. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients received gabapentin and 70 (83%) completed the study; 81 received placebo and 65 (80%) completed the study. By intent-to-treat analysis, gabapentin-treated patients' mean daily pain score at the study end point (baseline, 6.4; end point, 3.9; n = 82) was significantly lower (P<.001) compared with the placebo-treated patients' end-point score (baseline, 6.5; end point, 5.1; n = 80). All secondary outcome measures of pain were significantly better in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group. Additional statistically significant differences favoring gabapentin treatment were observed in measures of quality of life (Short Form-36 Quality of Life Questionnaire and Profile of Mood States). Adverse events experienced significantly more frequently in the gabapentin group were dizziness (20 [24%] in the gabapentin group vs 4 [4.9%] in the control group; P<.001) and somnolence (19 [23%] in the gabapentin group vs 5 [6%] in the control group; P = .003). Confusion was also more frequent in the gabapentin group (7 [8%] vs 1 [1.2%]; P = .06). CONCLUSION: Gabapentin monotherapy appears to be efficacious for the treatment of pain and sleep interference associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy and exhibits positive effects on mood and quality of life.

Acetates↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Gabapentin for hot flashes in 420 women with breast cancer: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most women receiving systemic therapy for breast cancer experience hot flashes. We undertook a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-institutional trial to assess the efficacy of gabapentin in controlling hot flashes in women with breast cancer. METHODS: 420 women with breast cancer who were having two or more hot flashes per day were randomly assigned placebo, gabapentin 300 mg/day, or gabapentin 900 mg/day by mouth in three divided doses for 8 weeks. Each patient kept a 1-week, self-report diary on the frequency, severity, and duration of hot flashes before the start of the study and during weeks 4 and 8 of treatment. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Evaluable data were available on 371 participants at 4 weeks (119 placebo, 123 gabapentin 300 mg, and 129 gabapentin 900 mg) and 347 at 8 weeks (113 placebo, 114 gabapentin 300 mg, and 120 gabapentin 900 mg). The percentage decreases in hot-flash severity score between baseline and weeks 4 and 8, respectively were: 21% (95% CI 12 to 30) and 15% (1 to 29) in the placebo group; 33% (23 to 43) and 31% (16 to 46) in the group assigned gabapentin 300 mg; and 49% (42 to 56) and 46% (34 to 58) in the group assigned gabapentin 900 mg. The differences between the groups were significant (p=0.0001 at 4 weeks and p=0.007 at 8 weeks by ANCOVA for overall treatment effect, adjusted for baseline values); only the higher dose of gabapentin was associated with significant decreases in hot-flash frequency and severity. INTERPRETATION: Gabapentin is effective in the control of hot flashes at a dose of 900 mg/day, but not at a dose of 300 mg/day. This drug should be considered for treatment of hot flashes in women with breast cancer.

Amines↗
PubMed2003

Gabapentin dosing in the treatment of epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentin is considered a safe and well-tolerated antipileptic drug (AED) with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile and a broad therapeutic index. However, recent studies have used higher doses and faster titration schedules than those used in the pivotal trials that established the efficacy of gabapentin in the treatment of partial seizures. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this review were to assess the gabapentin titration and dosing regimens that have been published in peer-reviewed journals, to develop dosing recommendations to maximize antiseizure efficacy without compromising tolerability, and to formulate guidelines for an adequate therapeutic assessment of gabapentin dosage efficacy. METHODS: In the absence of sufficient placebo-controlled, double-blind studies, a formal evidence-based assessment could not be performed. However, a MEDLINE search using the search terms gabapentin and epilepsy, spanning back to the year 1986, produced numerous published reports from randomized, placebo-controlled and open-label trials, as well as case reports. These were reviewed to assess the range of dosing and titration schedules reported. Reports that employed gabapentin doses and titration schedules were selected for review. RESULTS: Our review of this literature suggests improved seizure control at higher gabapentin maintenance dosages (< or =3600 mg/d) than are used today in clinical practice (1800 mg/d) without an increase in the incidence of adverse reactions. Most of the patients who received high dosages (eg, 3600 mg/d) or experienced fast titration rates tolerated gabapentin well. Side effects occurred around the onset of dosing and were reported in some studies to be transient. CONCLUSIONS: Based in the literature here, in most adult patients, gabapentin may be initiated at a dosage of 900 mg/d and titrated to maintenance dosages > or = 3600 mg/d. Children may be treated with gabapentin 23 to 78 mg/kg per day. Based on controlled and open trials, the majority of patients will tolerate gabapentin well enough for an adequate therapeutic assessment. Titration to effect can be accomplished rapidly, if necessary; however, as with other AEDs, optimal seizure control may take months to achieve.

Acetates↗
PubMed2000

Inter- and intra-subject variability in gabapentin absorption and absolute bioavailability.

UNLABELLED: Gabapentin (GBP) is a non-metabolized, non-plasma protein bound, renally excreted antiepileptic drug that is actively absorbed via the system L amino acid transporter. Previous studies have demonstrated that gabapentin displays dose-dependent absorption. OBJECTIVES: These studies were conducted to determine inter- and intra-subject variability of gabapentin absorption. Two prospective clinical studies in healthy adult volunteers were conducted. Coefficient of variation (CV) was used to express variability of gabapentin absorption. METHODS: Study A: 400-mg single dose, randomized, cross-over study to assess bioavailability of four different gabapentin formulations (n=20, 9 males, 11 females; mean age and weight 41 years, 75.1 kg). Plasma was serially collected up to 48 h and bioavailability (F) calculated post-dose to determine concentration-time curves (AUC). All four formulations were bioequivalent, thus repeated measures analysis was performed to assess inter-and intra-subject variability. Study B: 600-mg single dose study (n=50, 15 males, 35 females; mean age and weight 31.1 years, 72.7 kg) was conducted to determine inter-subject variability in gabapentin F. Urine was collected over 48 h and bioavailability (F) calculated. Urine and plasma gabapentin concentrations were measured by HPLC-UV. RESULTS: Study A: Overall mean (CV) of GBP AUC values was 34.1+/-24 ug/h per ml. Inter-subject CV for AUC was 22.5% and intra-subject CV was 12.1%. Study B: Overall mean (SD) GBP F was 49.3+/-13.6%. Inter-subject CV of F was 27.6%. DISCUSSION: The inter-subject variability in gabapentin absorption is substantially less than that of the inter-subject variability. This indicates that one would expect a wide range in gabapentin absorption between subjects; however, a much smaller variability within a subject. The within subject variability of gabapentin is small enough that plasma drug monitoring may be used to assess gabapentin absorption for a given subject and the benefit of dose individualization.

Acetates↗
PubMed2006

Spinal alpha(2)-adrenergic and muscarinic receptors and the NO release cascade mediate supraspinally produced effectiveness of gabapentin at decreasing mechanical hypersensitivity in mice after partial nerve injury.

After partial nerve injury, the central analgesic effect of systemically administered gabapentin is mediated by both supraspinal and spinal actions. We further evaluate the mechanisms related to the supraspinally mediated analgesic actions of gabapentin involving the descending noradrenergic system. Intracerebroventricularly (i.c.v.) administered gabapentin (100 microg) decreased thermal and mechanical hypersensitivity in a murine chronic pain model that was prepared by partial ligation of the sciatic nerve. These effects were abolished by intrathecal (i.t.) injection of either yohimbine (3 microg) or idazoxan (3 microg), alpha(2)-adrenergic receptor antagonists. Pretreatment with atropine (0.3 mg kg(-1), i.p. or 0.1 microg, i.t.), a muscarinic receptor antagonist, completely suppressed the effect of i.c.v.-injected gabapentin on mechanical hypersensitivity, whereas its effect on thermal hypersensitivity remained unchanged. Similar effects were obtained with pirenzepine (0.1 microg, i.t.), a selective M(1)-muscarinic receptor antagonist, but not with methoctramine (0.1 and 0.3 microg, i.t.), a selective M(2)-muscarinic receptor antagonist. The cholinesterase inhibitor neostigmine (0.3 ng, i.t.) potentiated only the analgesic effect of i.c.v. gabapentin on mechanical hypersensitivity, confirming spinal acetylcholine release downstream of the supraspinal action of gabapentin. Moreover, the effect of i.c.v. gabapentin on mechanical but not thermal hypersensitivity was reduced by i.t. injection of L-NAME (3 microg) or L-NMMA (10 microg), both of which are nitric oxide (NO) synthase inhibitors. Systemically administered naloxone (10 mg kg(-1), i.p.), an opioid receptor antagonist, failed to suppress the analgesic actions of i.c.v. gabapentin, indicating that opioid receptors are not involved in activation of the descending noradrenergic system by gabapentin. Thus, the supraspinally mediated effect of gabapentin on mechanical hypersensitivity involves activation of spinal alpha(2)-adrenergic receptors followed by muscarinic receptors (most likely M(1)) and the NO cascade. In contrast, the effect of supraspinal gabapentin on thermal hypersensitivity is independent of the spinal cholinergic-NO system.

Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Antagonists↗
PubMed2001

A crossover study of gabapentin in treatment of restless legs syndrome among hemodialysis patients.

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a common entity affecting hemodialysis patients. Although the cause of RLS remains unclear, a number of therapies have been used successfully to treat the disorder. Gabapentin is an anticonvulsant shown to alleviate symptoms of RLS in two small studies of nonhemodialysis patients. Because it is excreted renally, gabapentin has a long half-life among hemodialysis patients and may be advantageous if proven effective. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-crossover study of gabapentin in the treatment of RLS among a population of hemodialysis patients. Sixteen patients identified with RLS were randomized to either gabapentin or placebo. After 6 weeks of treatment with 200 to 300 mg of gabapentin after each hemodialysis session, patients' RLS was reassessed. After a 1-week washout period, patients were switched from gabapentin to placebo or placebo to gabapentin. After another 6 weeks, patients' RLS was assessed again. Patient data were analyzed using both parametric and nonparametric means. Thirteen of the 16 original patients completed the study. Two patients dropped out because of lethargy (believed to be secondary to gabapentin), and 1 patient died secondary to myocardial infarction. Eleven patients responded to gabapentin, but not placebo (P < 0.01). One patient responded to both, and 1 patient responded to placebo, but not gabapentin. Gabapentin is an effective treatment for RLS in hemodialysis patients.

Acetates↗
PubMed2002

Gabapentin and pregabalin can interact synergistically with naproxen to produce antihyperalgesia.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentin and pregabalin are anticonvulsants with antihyperalgesic effects in animal models of neuropathic and inflammatory nociception. This study characterized the manner in which gabapentin or pregabalin interacts with naproxen to suppress thermal hyperalgesia and inflammation in the carrageenan model of peripheral inflammation. METHODS: Gabapentin, pregabalin, naproxen, or a fixed-dose ratio of gabapentin + naproxen or pregabalin + naproxen was administered orally to rats after the induction of inflammation by intraplantar injection of lambda-carrageenan in one hind paw. Nociceptive thresholds were determined by the radiant heat paw-withdrawal test. Paw edema was measured by plethysmometry. Drug plasma concentrations were determined by a liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy-mass spectroscopy method. RESULTS: Gabapentin, pregabalin, and naproxen alone reversed thermal hyperalgesia with ED50 values of 19.2, 6.0, and 0.5 mg/kg, respectively. Mixtures of gabapentin + naproxen in fixed-dose ratios of 50:1, 10:1, or 1:1 interacted synergistically to reverse carrageenan-induced thermal hyperalgesia. However, 1:50 gabapentin + naproxen produced only additive effects. No combination of gabapentin + naproxen decreased paw edema in a manner greater than additive. Plasma concentrations of gabapentin and naproxen were unaltered by the addition of the other drug. The mixture of 10:1 of pregabalin + naproxen interacted synergistically to reverse thermal hyperalgesia on the inflamed hind paw, whereas mixtures of 1:1 or 1:10 produced additive effects. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that gabapentin + naproxen and pregabalin + naproxen can interact synergistically or additively to reverse thermal hyperalgesia associated with peripheral inflammation. Therefore, the use of gabapentin or pregabalin in low-dose combinations with naproxen may afford therapeutic advantages for clinical treatment of persistent inflammatory pain.

Acetates↗
PubMed2004

Characteristic of interactions between intrathecal gabapentin and either clonidine or neostigmine in the formalin test.

UNLABELLED: Intrathecal gabapentin is effective for phase 2 of the formalin response but not for acute pain. Unlike gabapentin, intrathecal clonidine and neostigmine attenuate both acute pain and phase 2 of the formalin response. We evaluated gabapentin's interactions with either clonidine or neostigmine in the formalin test. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used. For the formalin test, 50 microL of 5% formalin solution was injected into the hindpaw. The interaction of drugs was investigated by a fixed-dose analysis or an isobolographic analysis. Intrathecal gabapentin produced a suppression of the phase 2 flinching response, but not the phase 1 response, in the formalin test. Intrathecal clonidine and neostigmine resulted in a reduction of the pain behavior in both phases. A fixed-dose analysis in phase 1 showed that gabapentin potentiated the antinociceptive effect of clonidine and neostigmine. An isobolographic analysis in phase 2 revealed a synergistic interaction after intrathecal administration of gabapentin-clonidine or gabapentin-neostigmine mixture. We conclude that the combination of gabapentin with either clonidine or neostigmine at the level of the spinal cord could play a major role not only in acute pain, but also in phase 2 of the formalin response. IMPLICATIONS: We determined the pharmacological properties of gabapentin combined with either clonidine or neostigmine in the formalin test. Spinal gabapentin reinforced the effects of clonidine and neostigmine in the formalin test. The hitherto unreported action of gabapentin on acute nociceptive stimulus could be of considerable significance.

Acetates↗
PubMed2001

The anticonvulsant, antihyperalgesic agent gabapentin is an agonist at brain gamma-aminobutyric acid type B receptors negatively coupled to voltage-dependent calcium channels.

Gabapentin (Neurontin, Pfizer Global R & D) is a novel anticonvulsant, antihyperalgesic, and antinociceptive agent with a poorly understood mechanism of action. In this study, we show that gabapentin (EC50 2 microM) inhibited up to 70 to 80% of the total K+-evoked Ca2+ influx via voltage-dependent calcium channels (VD-CCs) in a mouse pituitary intermediate melanotrope clonal mIL-tsA58 (mIL) cell line. mIL cells endogenously express only gamma-aminobutyric acid type B (GABA(B)) gb1a-gb2 receptors. Moreover, activity of the agonist gabapentin was dose dependently and completely blocked with the GABA(B) antagonist CGP55845 and was nearly identical to the prototypic GABA(B) agonist baclofen in both extent and potency. Antisense knockdown of gb1a also completely blocked gabapentin activity, while gb1b antisense and control oligonucleotides had no effect, indicating that gabapentin inhibition of membrane Ca2+ mobilization in mIL cells was dependent on a functional GABA(B) (gb1a-gb2) heterodimer receptor. In addition, during combined whole cell recording and multiphoton Ca2+ imaging in hippocampal neurons in situ, gabapentin significantly inhibited in a dose-dependent manner subthreshold soma depolarizations and Ca2+ responses evoked by somatic current injection. Furthermore, gabapentin almost completely blocked Ca2+ action potentials and Ca2+ responses elicited by suprathreshold current injection. However, larger current injection overcame this inhibition of Ca2+ action potentials suggesting that gabapentin did not predominantly affect L-type Ca2+ channels. The depressant effect of gabapentin on Ca2+ responses was coupled to the activation of neuronal GABA(B) receptors since they were blocked by CGP55845, and baclofen produced similar effects. Thus gabapentin activation of neuronal GABA(B) gb1a-gb2 receptors negatively coupled to VD-CCs can be a potentially important therapeutic mechanism of action of gabapentin that may be linked to inhibition of neurotransmitter release in some systems.

Acetates↗
PubMed1999

Randomized double-blind study comparing the efficacy of gabapentin with amitriptyline on diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain.

BACKGROUND: Reports of gabapentin use in diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain stimulate a need for controlled trials to determine its comparative efficacy to the therapeutic standard of amitriptyline hydrochloride. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of gabapentin compared with amitriptyline in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover study. SETTING: Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, Ambulatory Care Clinic. PATIENTS: Twenty-eight veterans were referred by their primary care providers. Two patients withdrew before randomization because of no neuropathic pain after washout; a third withdrew for unexpected surgery that required analgesics. Three patients withdrew because of adverse effects and 1 for protocol violation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients with stable glycemic control and neuropathic pain randomized to 6 weeks of therapy with gabapentin, 900 to 1800 mg/d, or amitriptyline hydrochloride, 25 to 75 mg/d, with a 1-week washout before crossover. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain relief measured by pain scale with verbal descriptors and global pain score assessment at treatment end. RESULTS: Participants and investigators were blinded throughout. Mean dosages were of gabapentin, 1565 mg/d, and of amitriptyline hydrochloride, 59 mg/d. Sixty-five percent of patients reached maximum dose with gabapentin and 54% with amitriptyline. Mean score diary analysis showed pain relief with gabapentin and amitriptyline was not significantly different (P = .26). Global data were obtained from 21 of 25 enrolled patients who completed the study. Moderate or greater pain relief was experienced in 11 (52%) of 21 patients with gabapentin and 14 (67%) of 21 patients with amitriptyline. There were no significant period or carry-over effects (P = .35). CONCLUSIONS: Although both drugs provide pain relief, mean pain score and global pain score data indicate no significant difference between gabapentin and amitriptyline. Gabapentin may be an alternative for treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain, yet does not appear to offer considerable advantage over amitriptyline and is more expensive. Larger trials are necessary to define gabapentin's place in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain.

Acetates↗
PubMed1998

Gabapentin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is a syndrome of often intractable neuropathic pain following herpes zoster (shingles) that eludes effective treatment in many patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of the anticonvulsant drug gabapentin in reducing PHN pain. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel design, 8-week trial conducted from August 1996 through July 1997. SETTING: Sixteen US outpatient clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 229 subjects were randomized. INTERVENTION: A 4-week titration period to a maximum dosage of 3600 mg/d of gabapentin or matching placebo. Treatment was maintained for another 4 weeks at the maximum tolerated dose. Concomitant tricyclic antidepressants and/or narcotics were continued if therapy was stabilized prior to study entry and remained constant throughout the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy measure was change in the average daily pain score based on an 11-point Likert scale (0, no pain; 10, worst possible pain) from baseline week to the final week of therapy. Secondary measures included average daily sleep scores, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Subject Global Impression of Change and investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change, Short Form-36 (SF-36) Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Profile of Mood States (POMS). Safety measures included the frequency and severity of adverse events. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients received gabapentin, and 89 (78.8%) completed the study; 116 received placebo, and 95 (81.9%) completed the study. By intent-to-treat analysis, subjects receiving gabapentin had a statistically significant reduction in average daily pain score from 6.3 to 4.2 points compared with a change from 6.5 to 6.0 points in subjects randomized to receive placebo (P<.001). Secondary measures of pain as well as changes in pain and sleep interference showed improvement with gabapentin (P<.001). Many measures within the SF-36 and POMS also significantly favored gabapentin (P< or =.01). Somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, peripheral edema, and infection were all more frequent in the gabapentin group, but withdrawals were comparable in the 2 groups (15 [13.3%] in the gabapentin group vs 11 [9.5%] in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentin is effective in the treatment of pain and sleep interference associated with PHN. Mood and quality of life also improve with gabapentin therapy.

Acetates↗
PubMed1996

The antiepileptic agent gabapentin (Neurontin) possesses anxiolytic-like and antinociceptive actions that are reversed by D-serine.

This report describes the activity of the antiepileptic agent gabapentin (Neurontin) in animal models predictive of anxiolysis and analgesia. Gabapentin displayed anxiolytic-like action in the rat conflict test, the mouse light/dark box and the rat elevated X-maze with respective minimum effective doses (MEDs) of 3, 10 and 30 mg/kg. Furthermore, gabapentin also induced behavioural changes suggestive of anxiolysis in the marmoset human threat test with a MED of 30 mg/kg. In the rat formalin test of tonic nociception, gabapentin dose-dependently (30-300 mg/kg) and selectively blocked the late phase with a MED of 100 mg/kg. However, it failed to block carrageenan-induced paw oedema. The intracerebroventricular (ICV) administration of the glycine/NMDA receptor agonist D-Serine, dose-dependently (10-100 micrograms/animal) reversed the antinociceptive action of gabapentin (200 mg/kg, SC). D-Serine (30 micrograms/animal, ICV) also reversed the anxiolytic-like effects (in the light/dark box and the rat elevated X-maze) of gabapentin (30 mg/kg). In contrast, L-Serine (100 micrograms, ICV) failed to block the antinociceptive action of gabapentin. The antinociceptive action of (+)-HA-966 (25 mg/kg, SC), a partial agonist at the glycine/NMDA receptor, was reversed by D-Serine (100 micrograms/animal, ICV). However, D-Serine (100 micrograms/animal, ICV) failed to affect the antinociceptive action of a competitive NMDA receptor antagonist CGS 19755 (3 mg/kg, SC). Gabapentin has negligible affinity for the strychnine insensitive [3H]glycine binding site. This indicates that the interaction between gabapentin and D-Serine may not involve the NMDA receptor complex. Gabapentin may represent a novel type of anxiolytic and analgesic agent.

Acetates↗