Vishvarani Wanigasekera1, Melvin Mezue, Jesper Andersson, Yazhuo Kong, Irene Tracey. 1. From the Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB), University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attrition rates of new analgesics during drug development are high; poor assay sensitivity with reliance on subjective outcome measures being a crucial factor. METHODS: The authors assessed the utility of functional magnetic resonance imaging with capsaicin-induced central sensitization, a mechanism relevant in neuropathic pain, for obtaining mechanism-based objective outcome measures that can differentiate an effective analgesic (gabapentin) from an ineffective analgesic (ibuprofen) and both from placebo. The authors used a double-blind, randomized phase I study design (N = 24) with single oral doses. RESULTS: Only gabapentin suppressed the secondary mechanical hyperalgesia-evoked neural response in a region of the brainstem's descending pain modulatory system (right nucleus cuneiformis) and left (contralateral) posterior insular cortex and secondary somatosensory cortex. Similarly, only gabapentin suppressed the resting-state functional connectivity during central sensitization between the thalamus and secondary somatosensory cortex, which was plasma gabapentin level dependent. A power analysis showed that with 12 data sets, when using neural activity from the left posterior insula and right nucleus cuneiformis, a statistically significant difference between placebo and gabapentin was detected with probability ≥ 0.8. When using subjective pain ratings, this reduced to less than or equal to 0.6. CONCLUSIONS: Functional imaging with central sensitization can be used as a sensitive mechanism-based assay to guide go/no-go decisions on selecting analgesics effective in neuropathic pain in early human drug development. We also show analgesic modulation of neural activity by using resting-state functional connectivity, a less challenging paradigm that is ideally suited for patient studies because it requires no task or pain provocation.
BACKGROUND: Attrition rates of new analgesics during drug development are high; poor assay sensitivity with reliance on subjective outcome measures being a crucial factor. METHODS: The authors assessed the utility of functional magnetic resonance imaging with capsaicin-induced central sensitization, a mechanism relevant in neuropathic pain, for obtaining mechanism-based objective outcome measures that can differentiate an effective analgesic (gabapentin) from an ineffective analgesic (ibuprofen) and both from placebo. The authors used a double-blind, randomized phase I study design (N = 24) with single oral doses. RESULTS: Only gabapentin suppressed the secondary mechanical hyperalgesia-evoked neural response in a region of the brainstem's descending pain modulatory system (right nucleus cuneiformis) and left (contralateral) posterior insular cortex and secondary somatosensory cortex. Similarly, only gabapentin suppressed the resting-state functional connectivity during central sensitization between the thalamus and secondary somatosensory cortex, which was plasma gabapentin level dependent. A power analysis showed that with 12 data sets, when using neural activity from the left posterior insula and right nucleus cuneiformis, a statistically significant difference between placebo and gabapentin was detected with probability ≥ 0.8. When using subjective pain ratings, this reduced to less than or equal to 0.6. CONCLUSIONS: Functional imaging with central sensitization can be used as a sensitive mechanism-based assay to guide go/no-go decisions on selecting analgesics effective in neuropathic pain in early human drug development. We also show analgesic modulation of neural activity by using resting-state functional connectivity, a less challenging paradigm that is ideally suited for patient studies because it requires no task or pain provocation.
Authors: Mark W Woolrich; Timothy E J Behrens; Christian F Beckmann; Mark Jenkinson; Stephen M Smith Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Trang T Le; Rayus Kuplicki; Hung-Wen Yeh; Robin L Aupperle; Sahib S Khalsa; W Kyle Simmons; Martin P Paulus Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2018-06-23
Authors: Guido van Amerongen; Matthijs W de Boer; Geert Jan Groeneveld; Justin L Hay Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Owen Carmichael; Adam J Schwarz; Christopher H Chatham; David Scott; Jessica A Turner; Jaymin Upadhyay; Alexandre Coimbra; James A Goodman; Richard Baumgartner; Brett A English; John W Apolzan; Preetham Shankapal; Keely R Hawkins Journal: Drug Discov Today Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 7.851
Authors: Shannon M Smith; Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Ralf Baron; Michael Polydefkis; Irene Tracey; David Borsook; Robert R Edwards; Richard E Harris; Tor D Wager; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Laurie B Burke; Daniel B Carr; Amy Chappell; John T Farrar; Roy Freeman; Ian Gilron; Veeraindar Goli; Juergen Haeussler; Troels Jensen; Nathaniel P Katz; Jeffrey Kent; Ernest A Kopecky; David A Lee; William Maixner; John D Markman; Justin C McArthur; Michael P McDermott; Lav Parvathenani; Srinivasa N Raja; Bob A Rappaport; Andrew S C Rice; Michael C Rowbotham; Jeffrey K Tobias; Ajay D Wasan; James Witter Journal: J Pain Date: 2017-02-27 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Kelly T Cosgrove; Rayus Kuplicki; Jonathan Savitz; Kaiping Burrows; W Kyle Simmons; Sahib S Khalsa; T Kent Teague; Robin L Aupperle; Martin P Paulus Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 19.227