 |
|
Gabapentin for the Treatment of Postherpetic Neuralgia
A Randomized Controlled Trial
Michael Rowbotham, MD;
Norman Harden, MD;
Brett Stacey, MD;
Paula Bernstein, MS;
Leslie Magnus-Miller, MD;
for the Gabapentin Postherpetic Neuralgia Study Group
JAMA. 1998;280:1837-1842.
ABSTRACT
| |
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 .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.
INTRODUCTION
HERPES ZOSTER (shingles) is accompanied in the majority of patients by intense pain that is variously described as "burning," "deeply aching," "tearing," "electric shocklike," and "lancinating." Abnormalities of sensation in affected dermatomes are common, including hyperpathia or allodynia. While herpes zoster–associated pain tends to resolve spontaneously with time,1 some patients suffer from chronic, debilitating neuropathic pain that persists beyond the resolution of visible cutaneous manifestations of the underlying viral (varicella zoster) eruption. Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is most commonly defined as pain in the area affected by herpes zoster at least 3 months after crusting of the herpes zoster rash. Once established, PHN may persist for many years.
In the United States, more than a million new cases of herpes zoster arise each year.1 Approximately 10% to 15% of all people with herpes zoster develop PHN. The age distribution of its victims, however, includes a disproportionate number of the elderly; nearly half of older patients ( 60 years) with herpes zoster will have enduring neuropathic pain.1-3 Postherpetic neuralgia is usually refractory to simple analgesic therapies, and treatment most often is pharmacologic, including a wide variety of drugs and routes of delivery.4-5 The most commonly used agents are oral medications. Currently, the standard treatment for PHN is with various tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) (amitriptyline, desipramine, and clomipramine) either as monotherapy6-12 or in combination with other medications, such as carbamazepine or opioids.13-15 Unfortunately, only about 50% of patients treated with TCAs for PHN in clinical trials experience pain relief in the absence of intolerable adverse effects.16
Recent reviews and meta-analyses of 11 randomized, controlled clinical trials for PHN concluded that TCAs appeared to be the only agents that provided reliable pain relief.16-17 Tricyclic antidepressants, however, can also have significant adverse effects, such as arrhythmias, postural hypotension, sedation, dry mouth, constipation, confusion, and urinary retention. Their use is not appropriate in many patients with cardiovascular disease, which makes the use of these agents problematic in the 60 years and older age group, in which PHN is most prevalent. A single nonopioid agent that provides both substantial relief and a good safety profile is thus needed. Gabapentin (1-[aminomethyl]-cyclohexaneacetic acid; Neurontin, Parke-Davis, Division of Warner-Lambert Co, Morris Plains, NJ) is a structural analog of  -aminobutyric acid (GABA) that has shown some promise as such an agent.
Gabapentin is lipophilic and penetrates the blood-brain barrier. Its mechanism of action has not yet been fully elucidated, but appears not to involve binding to GABA receptors18 and is distinct from that of TCAs. Introduced in the United States in 1994 as an anticonvulsant, gabapentin is used clinically to benefit patients with epilepsy by reducing seizure frequency when added to conventional antiepileptic drug regimens.18-21 Preclinical studies have documented an analgesic effect of gabapentin in several rat models, including models of chronic neuropathic pain.22-25 Gabapentin has been reported anecdotally to relieve pain in patients with intractable neuropathic pain and reflex sympathetic dystrophy, allowing the reduction or termination of other analgesic medications and relieving symptoms associated with painful disease manifestations.26-29 It also reduced spontaneous pain and tactile allodynia in patients with peripheral or central pain.30 We report here the results of a large, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin for the pain of PHN.
METHODS
Study Design and Subjects
Subjects from 16 clinical centers participated in this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel design, 8-week trial, which was conducted from August 26, 1996, through July 14, 1997. The protocol and informed consents were approved by the institutional review board of each participating center. The study period included a 1-week baseline period followed by a 4-week titration period, during which a maximum tolerated dose (up to 3600 mg/d) was established for each subject. This was followed by a 4-week stable dosing period. Subjects were seen for a minimum of 5 scheduled visits: an initial enrollment visit (screening), a randomization visit (week 0, at the end of an intervening baseline week), and 3 subsequent visits after 2, 4, and 8 weeks of study treatment.
Inclusion criteria included the following: at least 18 years of age; pain present for more than 3 months after healing of a herpes zoster skin rash; a pain intensity score of at least 40 mm on the 100-mm Visual Analog Scale on the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) at screening and at randomization; average daily diary pain score of at least 4 (on a scale of 0-10) during the baseline week; and discontinuance of muscle relaxants, anticonvulsants, mexiletine, topical analgesics, and antiviral agents beginning at least 2 weeks prior to screening. Previously prescribed TCAs and/or narcotics could be continued if therapy was stabilized prior to study entry and remained constant throughout the study. At the screening visit, exclusion criteria included the following: prior treatment with gabapentin or demonstrated hypersensitivity to the drug or its ingredients; neurolytic or neurosurgical therapy for PHN; immunocompromised state; significant hepatic or renal insufficiency; significant hematological disease; severe pain other than that caused by PHN; use of experimental drugs or participation in a clinical study within 2 months of screening; a history of illicit drug or alcohol abuse within the last year; and any serious or unstable medical or psychological condition.
Eligible subjects who gave informed written consent underwent physical and neurological examinations, and blood samples were taken for routine hematology and chemistry. Medical histories and demographics were obtained. Subjects completed the SF-MPQ and were instructed on the completion of daily diaries that would assess overall pain and sleep.
At the second visit 1 week later (baseline, week 0), physical and neurological examinations were updated, subjects again completed the SF-MPQ, the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Profile of Mood States (POMS). Diaries were collected and reviewed. Subjects who continued to meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria and who had completed at least 4 diaries were randomized to receive gabapentin or placebo.
At each subsequent visit (weeks 2, 4, and 8), subjects completed the SF-MPQ, diaries were collected, and adverse events assessed. At the final visit (week 8), subjects again underwent physical and neurological examinations and completed the SF-36 and POMS. Subjects completed Global Impression of Change and investigators completed Clinical Global Impression of Change Questionnaires. Blood samples were taken for routine hematology and chemistry, and plasma concentration of gabapentin was determined. In the case of early termination, week 8 assessments were completed at the last study visit.
Randomization and Treatment
Randomization was performed by producing a randomization schedule that assigned each subject number to gabapentin or matching placebo in a 1:1 manner. Gabapentin and placebo were provided as identically appearing capsules and were packaged in subject-specific bottles based on the randomization schedule. As subjects enrolled at each site, they were sequentially assigned a subject number.
Study participants who at week 0 were randomly assigned to receive gabapentin began with an initial dose of 300 mg/d. The number of capsules (300 mg of gabapentin per capsule) taken daily increased over the next 4 weeks (titration period) in a step-up manner (900, 1800, 2400, and 3600 mg/d divided 3 times a day), to a maximum total dose of 3600 mg/d, regardless of whether efficacy was achieved at a lower dose, or until the subject developed intolerable adverse effects. In the latter event, dosage was decreased 1 level and continued at that level for the remainder of the study. If 1800 mg/d was not tolerated, a minimal dose of 1200 mg/d was permitted. The dose established during the titration period was maintained throughout the remainder of the study. Matching placebo capsules were similarly administered.
Data Collection and Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses for efficacy were conducted on 2 populations. The intent-to-treat population included those subjects who, once randomized to treatment, had evidence of taking at least 1 dose of study medication and provided at least 1 follow-up efficacy assessment. The efficacy-evaluable population consisted of those subjects who, in addition to meeting the criteria required for the intent-to-treat population, met strict protocol-specified criteria regarding study medication compliance, use of concomitant medications, and number of daily diaries returned.
The primary efficacy parameter—change in average daily pain score from the baseline week to the final study week—was evaluated from daily pain diaries and measured on an 11-point Likert scale having as end points 0 ("no pain") and 10 ("worst possible pain"). The minimum treatment group difference in change from baseline that was considered clinically meaningful was 1.5 points. Given the assumption that the SD for this parameter would be 3.4, a sample size of 80 evaluable patients in each treatment was required to provide 80% power to detect this difference with a 5% error rate for a 2-sided test.
The change from baseline week to final study week in average daily pain score was determined by calculating, for each patient evaluated, the average daily pain score for the baseline week and the final study week. The change in average daily pain score was then calculated as the difference between the 2 time periods. A secondary parameter—the change from baseline in average daily sleep rating score—was determined in the same manner.
Other secondary parameters were the SF-MPQ total score and the affective and sensory subscores. Each domain of the SF-36 and POMS was also evaluated. The change from baseline in each of the SF-MPQ, SF-36, and POMS assessments was determined. Additional secondary parameters were the present pain intensity (PPI) score from the SF-MPQ and the investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change and Subjects' Global Impression of Change.
Between-treatment comparisons for all the change from baseline parameters were accomplished by an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model, including fixed terms of treatment, center, treatment by center interaction, and baseline scoring as a covariate. A preliminary test of normality examining change in average daily pain score in the intent-to-treat population showed that the data for this population were not normally distributed. Therefore, data for the dependent variable were rank-transformed. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to assess PPI at the final visit and the investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change and Subjects' Global Impression of Change. For the evaluation of PPI, the test took baseline values into account. All P values reported are 2-tailed and no adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
RESULTS
A summary profile of the trial is presented in Figure 1, following guidelines recommended by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.31 A total of 229 subjects were randomized during the baseline visit. Of these, 184 (80.3%) completed the study, 15.3% discontinued the study because of adverse events, and the remaining 4.4% discontinued because of other reasons. The 2 treatment groups were comparable with respect to the proportion of patients who discontinued because of adverse events (P=.20) and the proportion of patients who completed the study (P=.62). Of those subjects treated with gabapentin who achieved stable dosing, 83.3% received at least 2400 mg/d and 65.0% received 3600 mg/d.
|
|
|
Figure 1.—Profile of randomized controlled trial. *Provided at least 1 follow-up efficacy assessment.  Includes lost to follow-up, personal reasons, and other.
|
|
|
Results for both populations (intent-to-treat and efficacy evaluable) per treatment group were similar for all parameters analyzed. The results presented here are for the intent-to-treat population only, which is a more conservative approach in analyzing these data.
Demographic and baseline clinical characteristics at randomization are presented in Table 1. There were no statistically significant differences in distribution of sex, age, or race between the gabapentin and placebo treatment groups. Similarly, there were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups in time since last herpes zoster eruption, baseline average daily pain score, prior PHN medications, or concomitant medications.
|
|
|
|
Table 1.—Demographic and Baseline Clinical Characteristics
|
|
|
Primary Outcome
The average daily pain score was significantly reduced at the end of the study in the gabapentin population (33.3% reduction) compared with the placebo population (7.7% reduction) (Table 2). At the end of week 8 (or the final week), the gabapentin population showed an average daily pain score of 4.2 (decrease of 2.1) vs the placebo population with an average daily pain score of 6.0 (decrease of 0.5) (P<.001). A comparison of change in average daily pain score over the course of the 8 weeks (Figure 2) shows this reduction was established at week 2, with a further reduction at week 4. At week 8, pain reduction was maintained at the week 4 level.
|
|
|
|
Table 2.—Summary of Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2.—Change from baseline in average daily pain score. Asterisk indicates P<.001.
|
|
|
Secondary Efficacy Parameters
Subjects who received gabapentin reported significantly improved average daily sleep rating scores over their placebo counterparts (P<.001) (Table 2). Mean scores on the SF-MPQ were also markedly improved for total pain (P<.001), as well as for the 2 components of this measure, sensory pain (P<.001) and affective pain (P<.001) (Table 2). The SF-MPQ ratings of PPI likewise were statistically significantly improved among subjects treated with gabapentin (P<.01). This included a rating of "no pain" at the final week in 16.0% of subjects treated with gabapentin compared with 8.8% of subjects treated with placebo.
The Subjects' Global Impression of Change Questionnaire indicated that gabapentin had provided valuable pain relief for many subjects. At the end of the study, 43.2% of subjects treated with gabapentin categorized their pain as much or moderately improved compared with 12.1% of the subjects treated with placebo (Figure 3). The majority of subjects receiving placebo (59.5%) reported no change in their level of pain in contrast to 22.9% of the subjects treated with gabapentin. The investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change showed similar results (Figure 4).
|
|
|
|
Figure 3.—Subjects' Global Impression of Change at week 8 (or last visit). No responses were provided for 15 subjects (13.8%) treated with gabapentin and 14 subjects (12.1%) treated with placebo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 4.—Investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression of Change at week 8 (or last visit). No responses were provided for 15 subjects (13.8%) treated with gabapentin and 14 subjects (12.1%) treated with placebo.
|
|
|
On the SF-36, measures relating to physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, vitality, and mental health all showed gabapentin to be superior to placebo (P.01; Table 3). Similarly, subjects treated with gabapentin showed significantly greater improvement than subjects treated with placebo in the POMS assessments of depression-dejection, anger-hostility, fatigue-inertia, and confusion-bewilderment, as well as in total mood disturbance (P.01; Table 3).
|
|
|
|
Table 3.—Summary of Quality-of-Life Outcome Measures, Short Form-36 Quality of Life Questionnaire and Profile of Mood States
|
|
|
Safety
Measures of frequency, nature, and severity of adverse events were derived from a total of 229 subjects, of whom 113 had received gabapentin and 116 placebo. Minor adverse events that were deemed associated with the study medication were reported in a total of 62 subjects (54.9%) receiving gabapentin and 32 subjects (27.6%) receiving placebo. No serious adverse events that were determined by the investigator to be related to gabapentin were reported. One death occurred in the placebo group during the study and was considered unrelated to the study medication. Overall, the most frequently reported adverse effects among the gabapentin group, which occurred at higher incidences than those in the placebo group, were somnolence (27.4% vs 5.2%), dizziness (23.9% vs 5.2%), ataxia (7.1% vs 0.0%), peripheral edema (9.7% vs 3.4%), and infection (8.0% vs 2.6%). Subjects in the older age range did not experience more of the central nervous system–related adverse effects of dizziness, somnolence, and ataxia than subjects in the younger age range. The most frequently reported adverse event noted in the placebo group was pain: 10.3% compared with 4.4% of subjects in the gabapentin group.
A total of 15 (13.3%) and 11 (9.5%) of subjects in the gabapentin and placebo treatment groups, respectively, withdrew from the study for adverse events described as related to the study medication. Dizziness led to withdrawal from the study of 6 subjects (5.3%) treated with gabapentin, while somnolence led to the withdrawal of 5 subjects (4.4%) treated with gabapentin. In the placebo group, 2 subjects (1.7%) withdrew from the study because of somnolence, and there were no withdrawals because of dizziness.
COMMENT
The results of our study clearly show that gabapentin reduces PHN pain compared with placebo. This was demonstrated on several measures of pain and as assessed by subjects as well as investigators. For the primary outcome variable, change in average daily pain score, the actual calculated power of the study in demonstrating the predicted level of efficacy of gabapentin approached 100%. In addition, several secondary outcome measures also showed gabapentin as superior to placebo. Sleep, several quality-of-life measures, and several mood state variables were significantly improved by gabapentin therapy. Significant improvement was evident during the titration phase (at the 2-week time period) and continued to accrue over the course of 8 weeks of treatment. Adverse effects of gabapentin were minor and well tolerated, consisting primarily of somnolence and dizziness. These 2 adverse effects accounted for most of the adverse event–related withdrawals. Despite doses of gabapentin up to 3600 mg/d in a population with an average age of 73 years, no serious drug-related adverse events were reported. In clinical practice, adverse effects such as these can be managed by a slower upward titration, dose reduction, and use of lower maximum doses than allowed in the clinical trial protocol. Serious adverse events, especially of a cardiovascular nature, were not evident. Overall, gabapentin reduced PHN pain with a very acceptable adverse effect profile.
The mechanism of action of gabapentin remains uncertain. Spinal cord neuronal calcium channels play a potentially important role in chronic neuropathic pain and are modulated by gabapentin. Analgesia through GABAergic neurotransmission effects is much less certain. Despite the uncertainty regarding the mechanism of action of gabapentin, the drug has been shown effective in rat models of chronic neuropathic pain.22-25 Results of treatment of PHN can likely be predicted by testing in preclinical neuropathic pain models because PHN is not only common, but has consistent symptomatology, a clear cause, and consistent neuropathology.
The current standard of treatment for PHN with oral medications are the TCAs. Nontricyclic antidepressants with better adverse effect and safety profiles, including the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, have not been proven equivalent to TCAs in terms of efficacy.16 In the elderly population afflicted with PHN, therapy with TCAs is frequently either contraindicated (usually for cardiovascular reasons) or poorly tolerated because of excessive sedation, cognitive impairment, dry mouth, constipation, sexual dysfunction, and orthostatic lightheadedness. Other approaches with good safety and evidence of efficacy, such as topical local anesthetics and topical aspirin-nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, are either unproven in long-term use or not commercially available.2 Topical capsaicin produces a modest improvement in pain after long-term use, but has a high rate of burning sensations that are unacceptably severe.1 Opioids are frequently used to treat PHN in clinical practice, but do not yet have adequate support from placebo-controlled studies of long-term use. Many of the problematic adverse effects of TCAs also pertain to the use of opioids, such as sedation, cognitive impairment, and constipation. In addition, many patients and physicians are reluctant to use medications that carry the stigma of being addicting, despite the lack of evidence that this is a problem in the PHN population.
From the safety and efficacy evidence in our study, a strong case can be made for considering gabapentin as a first-line oral medication for management of PHN pain. There are no studies directly comparing gabapentin with TCAs. From published systematic reviews of antidepressants and anticonvulsants for neuropathic pain by McQuay et al,32 comparisons of safety and efficacy can be made by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) for both parameters. The NNT is the reciprocal of the difference in the percentage of patients improved or harmed by active therapy compared with control therapy, expressed for benefit as 1/[(% improved active)-(% improved placebo)]. For placebo-controlled TCA studies of PHN pain, the NNT for benefit ranged from 1.9 to 4.1; for minor adverse events, the NNT ranged from 1.7 to 8.8; and for adverse events leading to study withdrawal, the NNT ranged from 13 to 37. From the data in Figure 4 and the text, the gabapentin NNT for benefit is 3.2, the NNT for minor adverse events is 3.7, and the NNT for adverse events leading to study withdrawal is 25. From this perspective, gabapentin should be considered at least as effective as TCAs, at least as safe, and with fewer contraindications to use.
Tricyclic antidepressants and opioids each have a different mechanism of action than gabapentin. Tricyclic antidepressants may relieve pain through serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake blockade, by blockade of  -adrenergic receptors, by sodium channel-blocking effects, and by relief of depression. Opioids relieve pain through activation of a family of specific receptors found in both the central and peripheral nervous systems. Because of its straightforward pharmacokinetics and relative lack of adverse drug interactions, multidrug regimens to control chronic neuropathic pain can include gabapentin if gabapentin monotherapy fails. In summary, based on the results of this 8-week study, gabapentin can be added to the list of first-line medications for treatment of chronic neuropathic pain syndromes such as PHN.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
| |
The authors would like to acknowledge the other members of the Gabapentin Postherpetic Neuralgia Study Group: the New England Medical Center, Boston, Mass (Daniel Carr, MD); the University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor (Jack Rosenberg, MD); Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University, St Louis, Mo (Edwin Dunteman, MD, now at St Louis University Pain Management Center); Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY (Joel Kreitzer, MD); Department of Neurology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (J. Douglas Mann, MD); Neurology Group Limited Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, Ariz (Eugenie Obbens, MD); Meridia Center for Rehabilitation and Pain Management, Warrensville Heights, Ohio (Edgar Ross, MD, and Jerome Yokiel, MD; Dr Ross is now at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass); University of Maryland Pain Center, Baltimore (Dawn Schell, MD); UCLA School of Medicine, DVA West Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, Calif (Elyse Singer, MD); Neurological Clinic of Texas, Dallas (R. Malcolm Stewart, MD); University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pain Evaluation and Treatment Institute, Pittsburgh, Pa (David Sinclair, MD); Department of Neurology, St Elizabeth's Medical Center, Boston, Mass (Ken Gorson, MD); and the Colorado Neurology and Headache Center, Denver (Jack Klapper, MD). Ms Kim Caswell, RN, BS, Parke-Davis, Morris Plains, NJ, served as a consultant.
Dr Magnus-Miller and Ms Bernstein are employees of Parke-Davis, Division of Warner-Lambert Co, and own stock and hold options to purchase further stock in the company. Drugs and compensation for study expenses were supplied by Parke-Davis, the study sponsor.
Correspondence: Michael Rowbotham, MD, UCSF Pain Clinical Research Center, 1701 Divisadero St, Suite 480, San Francisco, CA 94115.
Reprints: Leslie Magnus-Miller, MD, Parke-Davis, 201 Tabor Rd, Morris Plains, NJ 07950.
From the UCSF Pain Clinical Research Center, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Rowbotham); Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Ill (Dr Harden); Department of Anesthesiology, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland (Dr Stacey); and Departments of Biometrics (Ms Bernstein) and Medical Research (Dr Magnus-Miller), Parke-Davis, Morris Plains, NJ.
REFERENCES
1. Watson CPN, Tyler KL, Bickers DR, Millikan LE, Smith S, Coleman E. A randomized vehicle-controlled trial of topical capsaicin in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia. Clin Ther. 1993;15:510-526.
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
2. Kost RG, Straus SE. Postherpetic neuralgia—pathogenesis, treatment, and prevention. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:32-42.
FREE FULL TEXT
3. Herne K, Cirelli R, Lee P, Tyring SK. Antiviral therapy of acute herpes zoster in older patients. Drugs Aging. 1996;8:97-112.
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
4. Johnson RW. Aspects of postherpetic neuralgia: can we zap Z-aP? Pain Rev. 1996;3:117-135.
5. Watson CPN. The treatment of postherpetic neuralgia. Neurology. 1995;45(suppl 8):S58-S60.
6. Kishore-Kumar R, Max MB, Schafer SC, et al. Desipramine relieves postherpetic neuralgia. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1990;47:305-312.
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
7. Max MB, Schafer SC, Culnane BSN, Smoller B, Dubner R, Gracely RH. Amitriptyline, but not lorazepam, relieves postherpetic neuralgia. Neurology. 1988;38:1427-1432.
FREE FULL TEXT
8. Max MB. Treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia: antidepressants. Ann Neurol. 1994;35:S50-S53.
9. Takeda Y, Kobayashi H, Suzuki K, Sei Y, Nishio K, Ishizaki H. Analgesic effects of clomipramine (Anafranil) on postherpetic neuralgia. Skin Res. 1988;30:33-36.
10. Watson CPN, Evans RJ, Reed K, Merskey H, Goldsmith L, Warsh J. Amitriptyline versus placebo in postherpetic neuralgia. Neurology. 1982;32:671-673.
FREE FULL TEXT
11. Watson CPN, Evans RJ. A comparative trial of amitriptyline and zimelidine in post-herpetic neuralgia. Pain. 1985;23:387-394.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
12. Watson CP, Chipman M, Reed K, Evans RJ, Birkett N. Amitriptyline versus maprotiline in postherpetic neuralgia: a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial. Pain. 1992;48:29-36.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
13. Bowsher D. Postherpetic neuralgia and its treatment: a retrospective survey of 191 patients. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1996;12:290-299.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
14. Göbel H, Stadler T. Treatment of post-herpes zoster pain with tramadol: results of an open pilot study versus clomipramine with or without levomepromazine. Drugs. 1997;53(suppl 2):34-39.
15. Gerson GR, Jones RB, Luscombe DK. Studies on the concomitant use of carbamazepine and clomipramine for the relief of post-herpetic neuralgia. Postgrad Med J. 1977;53(suppl 4):104-109.
16. Kingery WS. A critical review of controlled clinical trials for peripheral neuropathic pain and complex regional pain syndromes. Pain. 1997;73:123-139.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
17. Volmink J, Lancaster T, Gray S, Silagy C. Treatments for postherpetic neuralgia—a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Fam Pract. 1996;13:84-91.
FREE FULL TEXT
18. Goa KL, Sorkin EM. Gabapentin: a review of its pharmacological properties and clinical potential in epilepsy. Drugs. 1993;46:409-427.
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
19. Bruni J, Saunders M, Anhut H, Sauermann W. Efficacy and safety of gabapentin (Neurontin): a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Neurology. 1991;41(suppl 1):330-331.
20. UK Gabapentin Study Group. Gabapentin in partial epilepsy. Lancet. 1990;335:1114-1117.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
21. US Gabapentin Study Group. Gabapentin as add-on therapy in refractory partial epilepsy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Neurology. 1993;43:2292-2298.
FREE FULL TEXT
22. Gillin S, Sorkin LS. Gabapentin reverses the allodynia produced by the administration of anti-GD2 ganglioside, an immunotherapeutic drug. Anesth Analg. 1998;86:111-116.
ABSTRACT
23. Hwang JH, Yaksh TL. Effect of subarachnoid gabapentin on tactile-evoked allodynia in a surgically induced neuropathic pain model in the rat. Reg Anesth. 1997;22:249-256.
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
24. Singh L, Field MJ, Ferris P, et al. The antiepileptic agent gabapentin (Neurontin) possesses anxiolytic-like and antinociceptive actions that are reversed by D-serine. Psychopharmacology. 1996;127:1-9.
PUBMED
25. Xiao W-H, Bennett GJ. Gabapentin has an antinociceptive effect mediated via a spinal site of action in a rat model of painful peripheral neuropathy. Pain. 1996;2:267-273.
26. Mellick GA, Mellicy LB, Mellick LB. Gabapentin in the management of reflex sympathetic dystrophy. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1995;10:265-266.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
27. Rosner H, Rubin L, Kestenbaum A. Gabapentin adjunctive therapy in neuropathic pain states. Clin J Pain. 1996;12:56-58.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
28. Stacey BR, Owen GT, Sinclair JD, Glick RM, Tipton KD. Gabapentin for neuropathic pain states: a case series report [Abstract]. Reg Anesth. 1996;21:S65.
29. Rosenberg JM, Harrell C, Ristic H, Werner R, de Rosayro AM. The effect of gabapentin on neuropathic pain. Clin J Pain. 1997;13:251-255.
FULL TEXT
|
WEB OF SCIENCE
| PUBMED
30. Attal N, Parker F, Brasseur L, Chauvin M, Bouhassira D. Efficacy of gabapentin on neuropathic pain: a pilot study. In: Program and abstracts of the 16th Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Pain Society; October 23-26, 1997; New Orleans, La. Abstract 653.
31. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276:637-639.
FREE FULL TEXT
32. McQuay H, Carroll D, Jadad AR, Wiffen P, Moore A. Anticonvulsant drugs for management of pain: a systematic review. BMJ. 1995;311:1047-1052.
FREE FULL TEXT
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTER
Gabapentin for Postherpetic Neuralgia
Eric Colman, Bruce V. Stadel, Michael C. Rowbotham, Leslie Magnus-Miller, and Paula Bernstein
JAMA. 1999;282(2):134-135.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLES
Gabapentin for the Symptomatic Treatment of Painful Neuropathy in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Miroslav Backonja, Ahmad Beydoun, Keith R. Edwards, Sherwyn L. Schwartz, Vivian Fonseca, Marykay Hes, Linda LaMoreaux, Elizabeth Garofalo, and for the Gabapentin Diabetic Neuropathy Study Group
JAMA. 1998;280(21):1831-1836.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Symptomatic Treatment of Painful Neuropathy
Phillip A. Low and Rose M. Dotson
JAMA. 1998;280(21):1863-1864.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
December 2, 1998
JAMA. 1998;280(21):1885-1886.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
A 70-Year-Old Woman With Shingles: Review of Herpes Zoster
Whitley
JAMA 2009;302:73-80.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Essentials of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: Musculoskeletal Disorders, Pain, and Rehabilitation
Nampiaparampil
JAMA 2009;301:1178-1179.
FULL TEXT
Herpes Zoster (Shingles) and Postherpetic Neuralgia
Sampathkumar et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84:274-280.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Management of Neuropathic Cancer Pain Following WHO Analgesic Ladder: A Prospective Study
Mishra et al.
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2009;25:447-451.
ABSTRACT
Clinical Pharmacokinetics of XP13512, a Novel Transported Prodrug of Gabapentin
Cundy et al.
J Clin Pharmacol 2008;48:1378-1388.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Spinal cord mechanisms of pain
D'Mello and Dickenson
Br J Anaesth 2008;101:8-16.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comparison of analgesic effects and patient tolerability of nabilone and dihydrocodeine for chronic neuropathic pain: randomised, crossover, double blind study
Frank et al.
BMJ 2008;336:199-201.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Incidence and Management of Phantom Limb Pain According to World Health Organization Analgesic Ladder in Amputees of Malignant Origin
Mishra et al.
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2008;24:455-462.
ABSTRACT
Edema in a patient receiving methadone for chronic low back pain
Kharlamb and Kourlas
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2007;64:2557-2560.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin: a multimodal perioperative drug?
Kong and Irwin
Br J Anaesth 2007;99:775-786.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Pregabalin: Its Pharmacology and Use in Pain Management
Gajraj
Anesth. Analg. 2007;105:1805-1815.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Population-Based Study of the Incidence and Complication Rates of Herpes Zoster Before Zoster Vaccine Introduction
Yawn et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:1341-1349.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Preoperative Use of Gabapentin, Dexamethasone, and Their Combination in Varicocele Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Koc et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2007;105:1137-1142.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effectiveness of gabapentin in the treatment of chronic post-thoracotomy pain
Solak et al.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2007;32:9-12.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Pain Management: A Fundamental Human Right
Brennan et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2007;105:205-221.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
References
APPI Online CME 2007;2007:2-2.
FULL TEXT
Relief of Idiopathic Subjective Tinnitus: Is Gabapentin Effective?
Piccirillo et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;133:390-397.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Varicella-Zoster Vaccine for the Prevention of Herpes Zoster
Kimberlin and Whitley
NEJM 2007;356:1338-1343.
FULL TEXT
Management Strategies for Herpes Zoster and Postherpetic Neuralgia
Galluzzi
JAOA: Journal of the American Osteopathic Association 2007;107:S8-S13.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cannabis in painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy: A randomized placebo-controlled trial
Abrams et al.
Neurology 2007;68:515-521.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improvement of Postherpetic Neuralgia After Treatment With Intravenous Acyclovir Followed by Oral Valacyclovir
Quan et al.
Arch Neurol 2006;63:940-942.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The use of gabapentin for post-operative and post-traumatic pain in thoracic surgery patients.
Sihoe et al.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2006;29:795-799.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for the Management of Neuropathic Pain: The Effects of Frequency and Electrode Position on Prevention of Allodynia in a Rat Model of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type II
Somers and Clemente
ptjournal 2006;86:698-709.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The impact of therapy on quality of life and mood in neuropathic pain: what is the effect of pain reduction?
Deshpande et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2006;102:1473-1479.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Consensus Guidelines: Treatment Planning and Options
Argoff et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:S12-S25.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A cross-sectional survey of health state impairment and treatment patterns in patients with postherpetic neuralgia
van Seventer et al.
Age Ageing 2006;35:132-137.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Editorial II: Gabapentin: a new drug for postoperative pain?
Rowbotham
Br J Anaesth 2006;96:152-155.
FULL TEXT
Placebo response in clinical trials of depression and its implications for research on chronic neuropathic pain
Dworkin et al.
Neurology 2005;65:S7-S19.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Clinical trials studying pharmacotherapy and psychological treatments alone and together
Haythornthwaite
Neurology 2005;65:S20-S31.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Mechanisms of neuropathic pain and their implications for the design of clinical trials
Rowbotham
Neurology 2005;65:S66-S73.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
From The Cover: Pharmacological modulation of pain-related brain activity during normal and central sensitization states in humans
Iannetti et al.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005;102:18195-18200.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Systemic Administration of Local Anesthetics to Relieve Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Tremont-Lukats et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2005;101:1738-1749.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Multimodal Analgesia with Gabapentin and Local Anesthetics Prevents Acute and Chronic Pain After Breast Surgery for Cancer
Fassoulaki et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2005;101:1427-1432.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Randomized, controlled trial of cannabis-based medicine in central pain in multiple sclerosis
Rog et al.
Neurology 2005;65:812-819.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A single dose of gabapentin reduces acute pain and allodynia in patients with herpes zoster
Berry and Petersen
Neurology 2005;65:444-447.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Comparative Evaluation of Gabapentin and Carbamazepine for Pain Management in Guillain-Barre Syndrome Patients in the Intensive Care Unit
Pandey et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2005;101:220-225.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Contemporary assessment and management of neuropathic pain
Irving
Neurology 2005;64:S21-S27.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Quality of life in chronic illness: perceptions of parents and paediatricians
Janse et al.
Arch. Dis. Child. 2005;90:486-491.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Morphine, Gabapentin, or Their Combination for Neuropathic Pain
Gilron et al.
NEJM 2005;352:1324-1334.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Combination Therapy for Neuropathic Pain -- Which Drugs, Which Combination, Which Patients?
Raja and Haythornthwaite
NEJM 2005;352:1373-1375.
FULL TEXT
Divalproex sodium in the management of post-herpetic neuralgia: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study
Kochar et al.
QJM 2005;98:29-34.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treatment of chronic pain in persons with dementia: An overview
Rubey
AM J ALZHEIMERS DIS OTHER DEMEN 2005;20:12-20.
ABSTRACT
Pregabalin relieves symptoms of painful diabetic neuropathy: A randomized controlled trial
Lesser et al.
Neurology 2004;63:2104-2110.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Contemporary Management of Neuropathic Pain for the Primary Care Physician
Chen et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2004;79:1533-1545.
ABSTRACT
XP13512 [({+/-})-1-([({alpha}-Isobutanoyloxyethoxy)carbonyl] aminomethyl)-1-cyclohexane Acetic Acid], A Novel Gabapentin Prodrug: I. Design, Synthesis, Enzymatic Conversion to Gabapentin, and Transport by Intestinal Solute Transporters
Cundy et al.
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2004;311:315-323.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
XP13512 [({+/-})-1-([({alpha}-Isobutanoyloxyethoxy)carbonyl] aminomethyl)-1-cyclohexane Acetic Acid], A Novel Gabapentin Prodrug: II. Improved Oral Bioavailability, Dose Proportionality, and Colonic Absorption Compared with Gabapentin in Rats and Monkeys
Cundy et al.
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2004;311:324-333.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Effects of Intrathecal Gabapentin on Spinal Morphine Tolerance in the Rat Tail-Flick and Paw Pressure Tests
Hansen et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2004;99:1180-1184.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Practice Parameter: Treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: An evidence-based report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology
Dubinsky et al.
Neurology 2004;63:959-965.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Adjuvant Analgesics in Cancer Pain Management
Lussier et al.
The Oncologist 2004;9:571-591.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Analgesic Effects of Gabapentin in Monitored Anesthesia Care for Ear-Nose-Throat Surgery
Turan et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2004;99:375-378.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
80-Year-Old Man With Fever and Ear Pain
Lim and Takahashi
Mayo Clin Proc. 2004;79:1055-1058.
Gabapentin for Neuropathic Cancer Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial From the Gabapentin Cancer Pain Study Group
Caraceni et al.
JCO 2004;22:2909-2917.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: dosing to achieve optimal clinical response
Gomez-Perez et al.
British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease 2004;4:173-178.
ABSTRACT
The Analgesic Effects of Gabapentin After Total Abdominal Hysterectomy
Turan et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2004;98:1370-1373.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Effects of Remifentanil and Gabapentin on Hyperalgesia in a New Extended Inflammatory Skin Pain Model in Healthy Volunteers
Gustorff et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2004;98:401-407.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin in the treatment of neuropathic pain
Bennett and Simpson
Palliat Med 2004;18:5-11.
ABSTRACT
Gabapentin in the prophylaxis of chronic daily headache: A randomized, placebo-controlled study
Spira and Beran
Neurology 2003;61:1753-1759.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Advances in Neuropathic Pain: Diagnosis, Mechanisms, and Treatment Recommendations
Dworkin et al.
Arch Neurol 2003;60:1524-1534.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Management of Painful Conditions in the Elderly
Ghafoor
Journal of Pharmacy Practice 2003;16:276-283.
ABSTRACT
Pregabalin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial
Dworkin et al.
Neurology 2003;60:1274-1283.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Topical ketamine treatment of postherpetic neuralgia
Quan et al.
Neurology 2003;60:1391-1392.
FULL TEXT
Oral Opioid Therapy for Chronic Peripheral and Central Neuropathic Pain
Rowbotham et al.
NEJM 2003;348:1223-1232.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Incorporating Pain Management Training Into the Psychiatry Residency Curriculum
Leo et al.
Acad. Psychiatry 2003;27:1-11.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin for the Treatment of Pain in Guillain-Barre Syndrome: A Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Study
Pandey et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2002;95:1719-1723.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin and the Neurokinin1 Receptor Antagonist CI-1021 Act Synergistically in Two Rat Models of Neuropathic Pain
Field et al.
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2002;303:730-735.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Opioids versus antidepressants in postherpetic neuralgia: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial
Raja et al.
Neurology 2002;59:1015-1021.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Analgesics for the Treatment of Pain in Children
Berde and Sethna
NEJM 2002;347:1094-1103.
FULL TEXT
The Analgesic Effect of Gabapentin and Mexiletine After Breast Surgery for Cancer
Fassoulaki et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2002;95:985-991.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Mechanisms of pain modulation in chronic syndromes
Bolay and Moskowitz
Neurology 2002;59:S2-7.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use of anticonvulsants for treatment of neuropathic pain
Backonja
Neurology 2002;59:S14-17.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Herpes Zoster
Gnann and Whitley
NEJM 2002;347:340-346.
FULL TEXT
Gabapentin for coeliac plexus pain
Pelham et al.
Palliat Med 2002;16:355-356.
Double-blind, randomized trial of bupropion SR for the treatment of neuropathic pain
Semenchuk et al.
Neurology 2001;57:1583-1588.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Clinical case study.
Haglund et al.
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2001;18:429-431.
Gabapentin neurotoxicity in a chronic haemodialysis patient
Bassilios et al.
Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001;16:2112-2113.
FULL TEXT
The Use of a Computer-Based Decision Support System Facilitates Primary Care Physicians' Management of Chronic Pain
Knab et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2001;93:712-720.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Mechanisms of neuropathic pain
Bridges et al.
Br J Anaesth 2001;87:12-26.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Complex regional pain syndrome
Harden
Br J Anaesth 2001;87:99-106.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin: resistant neuropathic pain and malignancy
Ross et al.
Palliat Med 2001;15:348-349.
Differential Effect of Gabapentin on Neuronal and Muscle Calcium Currents
Alden and García
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2001;297:727-735.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Postherpetic neuralgia
Bowsher et al.
BMJ 2001;322:859-859.
FULL TEXT
Upregulation of Dorsal Root Ganglion {alpha}2{delta} Calcium Channel Subunit and Its Correlation with Allodynia in Spinal Nerve-Injured Rats
Luo et al.
J. Neurosci. 2001;21:1868-1875.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
{gamma}-Aminobutyric Acid Type B Receptors with Specific Heterodimer Composition and Postsynaptic Actions in Hippocampal Neurons Are Targets of Anticonvulsant Gabapentin Action
Ng et al.
Mol. Pharmacol. 2001;59:144-152.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Drug treatment of neuropathic pain
DTB 2000;38:89-93.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A New Treatment for Postherpetic Neuralgia
Watson
NEJM 2000;343:1563-1565.
FULL TEXT
Lack of efficacy of riluzole in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain conditions
Galer et al.
Neurology 2000;55:971-975.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Recent advances: Palliative care
Billings
BMJ 2000;321:555-558.
FULL TEXT
Gabapentin in Pain Management
Mao and Chen
Anesth. Analg. 2000;91:680-687.
FULL TEXT
Herpes Zoster
Carver et al.
NEJM 2000;343:221-223.
FULL TEXT
Gabapentin Enhances the Analgesic Effect of Morphine in Healthy Volunteers
Eckhardt et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2000;91:185-191.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin vs Amitriptyline for the Treatment of Peripheral Neuropathy
Fudin et al.
Arch Intern Med 2000;160:1040-1041.
FULL TEXT
Gabapentin for treatment of thalamic pain syndrome
Holtom
Palliat Med 2000;14:167-167.
Intrathecally Administered Gabapentin Inhibits Formalin-Evoked Nociception and the Expression of Fos-Like Immunoreactivity in the Spinal Cord of the Rat
Kaneko et al.
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2000;292:743-751.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin for Postherpetic Neuralgia
Colman et al.
JAMA 1999;282:134-135.
FULL TEXT
Topiramate relieves refractory intercostal neuralgia
Bajwa et al.
Neurology 1999;52:1917-1917.
FULL TEXT
Recent Advances in Varicella-Zoster Virus Infection
Cohen et al.
ANN INTERN MED 1999;130:922-932.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gabapentin Effective for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain
JWatch Psychiatry 1999;1999:17-17.
FULL TEXT
|
