Effectiveness and Safety of Intrathecal Ziconotide: Interim Analysis of the Patient Registry of Intrathecal Ziconotide Management (PRIZM)

34Citations
Citations of this article
51Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The Patient Registry of Intrathecal Ziconotide Management (PRIZM) evaluated long-term effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of intrathecal ziconotide treatment in clinical practice. Methods: Patient Registry of Intrathecal Ziconotide Management was an open-label, long-term, multicenter, observational study of adult patients with severe chronic pain. This interim analysis (data through July 10, 2015) of ziconotide as the first vs. not first intrathecal agent in pump included change from baseline in the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS; primary efficacy measure) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scores. Results: Enrollment closed at 93 patients; data collection was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. Fifty-one patients (54.8%) received ziconotide as the first agent in pump (FIP+), whereas 42 (45.2%) did not (FIP−). Mean (SD) baseline NPRS scores were 7.4 (1.9) and 7.9 (1.6) in FIP+ and FIP− patients, respectively. Mean (SEM) percentage changes in NPRS scores were −29.4% (5.5%) in FIP+ patients (n = 26) and +6.4% (7.7%) in FIP− patients (n = 17) at month 6 and −34.4% (9.1%) in FIP+ patients (n = 14) and −3.4% (10.2%) in FIP− patients (n = 9) at month 12. Improvement from baseline, measured by PGIC score, was reported in 69.2% of FIP+ (n = 26) and 35.7% of FIP− (n = 14) patients at month 6 and 85.7% of FIP+ (n = 7) and 71.4% of FIP− (n = 7) patients at month 12. The most common adverse events (≥ 10% of patients overall as of the data cut) were nausea (19.6% vs. 7.1% of FIP+ vs. FIP− patients, respectively), confusional state (9.8% vs. 11.9%), and dizziness (13.7% vs. 7.1%). Conclusions: Greater improvements in efficacy outcomes were observed when ziconotide was initiated as first-line intrathecal therapy vs. not first intrathecal agent in pump. The adverse event profile was consistent with the ziconotide prescribing information.

References Powered by Scopus

Intrathecal Ziconotide in the Treatment of Refractory Pain in Patients with Cancer or AIDS: A Randomized Controlled Trial

600Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Ziconotide for treatment of severe chronic pain

321Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Intrathecal Ziconotide in Adults with Severe Chronic Pain

286Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Structure of human Ca<inf>v</inf>2.2 channel blocked by the painkiller ziconotide

107Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Intrathecal therapy for chronic pain: A review of morphine and ziconotide as firstline options

106Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

45Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Deer, T., Rauck, R. L., Kim, P., Saulino, M. F., Wallace, M., Grigsby, E. J., … McDowell, G. C. (2018). Effectiveness and Safety of Intrathecal Ziconotide: Interim Analysis of the Patient Registry of Intrathecal Ziconotide Management (PRIZM). Pain Practice, 18(2), 230–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12599

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘250481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 10

40%

Researcher 8

32%

Lecturer / Post doc 4

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

12%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 17

61%

Nursing and Health Professions 6

21%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 3

11%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0