NCT00125268

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to determine if near infrared light therapy is effective in decreasing pain in patients with painful peripheral neuropathy. The hypothesis of the study was that the percentage of subjects with at least 40% improvement in visual analog scale score for pain after 4 weeks of treatment is higher for Monochromatic Near-infrared Photoenergy (MIRE) treatment than for sham treatment.

Trial Health

57
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
30

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for phase_3

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2005

Longer than P75 for phase_3

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
terminated

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

July 1, 2005

Completed
26 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

July 27, 2005

Completed
2 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

July 29, 2005

Completed
4.7 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

April 1, 2010

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

April 1, 2010

Completed
2.4 years until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

September 5, 2012

Completed
Last Updated

September 5, 2012

Status Verified

August 1, 2012

Enrollment Period

4.8 years

First QC Date

July 27, 2005

Results QC Date

August 2, 2012

Last Update Submit

August 2, 2012

Conditions

Keywords

painfulperipheralneuropathylighttherapy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Percentage of Subjects That Have a Greater Than or Equal to Forty Percent Decrease on the Visual Analog Pain Scale at the End of Four Weeks of Treatment

    Pain was measured by a 10 cm long Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS does not have any pre-set marks between the extremes. On this scale 0 means no pain and 10 cm means extreme pain. The investigator measures the mark made by the subject in cm and records this for the value of pain.

    baseline, 4 weeks

Secondary Outcomes (2)

  • Percentage of Subjects That Have a Forty Percent Reduction of Pain Measured by the Neuropathic Pain Scale at the End of Four Weeks of Treatment

    baseline, 4 weeks

  • Percentage of Subjects That Have an Improvement of Two Points or More on the SF-8 at the End of Four Weeks of Treatment

    baseline, 4 weeks

Study Arms (2)

MIRE

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Subjects randomized to this arm will receive treatment with monochromatic near infrared photo energy (MIRE).

Device: MIRE

Sham

SHAM COMPARATOR

Subjects randomized to this arm will receive treatment with the sham device, which is non-active but otherwise identical to the study device.

Device: Sham Device

Interventions

MIREDEVICE

Monochromatic near infrared photo energy (MIRE). A 30-minute application of MIRE results in a radiant exposure of 43.2 joules per square centimeter (J/cm\^2). The design of the flexible pads allows the infrared energy to be delivered perpendicular to and in contact with the involved site. MIRE applied to the skin facilitates the release of a small molecule of the free radical nitric oxide from hemoglobin and other proteins in surrounding tissue. Increased levels of nitric oxide improve the circulation of blood enhancing wound healing and reducing pain.

Also known as: Anodyne Therapy System
MIRE

The sham device is non-active but otherwise identical to the study device.

Sham

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 85 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Adults ages 18-85; able to give informed consent
  • Documented painful, distal peripheral neuropathy of idiopathic cause, or related to impaired glucose tolerance or diabetes mellitus.
  • Neuropathy documented by one of the following studies: nerve conduction studies and needle electromyography (EMG); quantitative sensory testing of the foot with Computer Aided Sensory Evaluator (CASE IV); quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (Quantitative Sweat MeasurementSystem \[Q-Sweat\]); neurology specialty examination; and neuropathy impairment score (NIS) of less than 25.
  • Stable pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain for at least two weeks.
  • Optimal pharmacotherapy has been achieved.
  • Subjects cannot be on Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX 2) inhibitors
  • Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of greater than or equal to 4/10
  • Subject has provided written informed consent
  • Not currently using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS)
  • Not currently receiving acupuncture

You may not qualify if:

  • Pregnant or likely to become pregnant
  • Current diagnosis of cancer
  • Neuropathy impairment score (NIS) of greater than 25.
  • Diagnosis of severe neuropathy of known etiology for which specific treatment is available (i.e., acute and chronic inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathies, vasculitis, B 12 deficiency).
  • Unstable diabetes mellitus defined as a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) greater than 9%, and/or 10% of fasting blood sugars greater than 300 mg/dl for the week prior to enrollment.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Mayo Clinic Arizona

Scottsdale, Arizona, 85254, United States

Location

Related Publications (10)

  • Galer BS, Jensen MP. Development and preliminary validation of a pain measure specific to neuropathic pain: the Neuropathic Pain Scale. Neurology. 1997 Feb;48(2):332-8. doi: 10.1212/wnl.48.2.332.

    PMID: 9040716BACKGROUND
  • Backonja M, Beydoun A, Edwards KR, Schwartz SL, Fonseca V, Hes M, LaMoreaux L, Garofalo E. Gabapentin for the symptomatic treatment of painful neuropathy in patients with diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1998 Dec 2;280(21):1831-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.21.1831.

    PMID: 9846777BACKGROUND
  • Dyck PJ, Kratz KM, Lehman KA, Karnes JL, Melton LJ 3rd, O'Brien PC, Litchy WJ, Windebank AJ, Smith BE, Low PA, et al. The Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study: design, criteria for types of neuropathy, selection bias, and reproducibility of neuropathic tests. Neurology. 1991 Jun;41(6):799-807. doi: 10.1212/wnl.41.6.799.

    PMID: 2046920BACKGROUND
  • Holland NR. Idiopathic painful sensory neuropathy. J Clin Neuromuscul Dis. 2001 Jun;2(4):211-20. doi: 10.1097/00131402-200106000-00008.

    PMID: 19078638BACKGROUND
  • Kochman AB, Carnegie DH, Burke TJ. Symptomatic reversal of peripheral neuropathy in patients with diabetes. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2002 Mar;92(3):125-30. doi: 10.7547/87507315-92-3-125.

    PMID: 11904323BACKGROUND
  • Leonard DR, Farooqi MH, Myers S. Restoration of sensation, reduced pain, and improved balance in subjects with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study with monochromatic near-infrared treatment. Diabetes Care. 2004 Jan;27(1):168-72. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.1.168.

    PMID: 14693984BACKGROUND
  • Mendell JR, Sahenk Z. Clinical practice. Painful sensory neuropathy. N Engl J Med. 2003 Mar 27;348(13):1243-55. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp022282. No abstract available.

    PMID: 12660389BACKGROUND
  • Prendergast JJ, Miranda G, Sanchez M. Improvement of sensory impairment in patients with peripheral neuropathy. Endocr Pract. 2004 Jan-Feb;10(1):24-30. doi: 10.4158/EP.10.1.24.

    PMID: 15251618BACKGROUND
  • Koltzenburg M. Painful neuropathies. Curr Opin Neurol. 1998 Oct;11(5):515-21. doi: 10.1097/00019052-199810000-00014.

    PMID: 9848001BACKGROUND
  • Wolfe GI, Trivedi JR. Painful peripheral neuropathy and its nonsurgical treatment. Muscle Nerve. 2004 Jul;30(1):3-19. doi: 10.1002/mus.20057.

    PMID: 15221874BACKGROUND

Related Links

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Peripheral Nervous System DiseasesPain

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Neuromuscular DiseasesNervous System DiseasesNeurologic ManifestationsSigns and SymptomsPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Limitations and Caveats

This study was terminated early because the study was unable to enroll enough patients.

Results Point of Contact

Title
Dr. Matthew A. Butters
Organization
Mayo Clinic

Study Officials

  • Matthew A Butters, MD

    Mayo Clinic

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
Yes
Restrictive Agreement
No

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 3
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
QUADRUPLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

July 27, 2005

First Posted

July 29, 2005

Study Start

July 1, 2005

Primary Completion

April 1, 2010

Study Completion

April 1, 2010

Last Updated

September 5, 2012

Results First Posted

September 5, 2012

Record last verified: 2012-08

Locations