More Lackluster Results for Non-Opioid Pain Reliever

By Pat Anson

New questions are being raised about the effectiveness of an experimental analgesic and whether it can be a viable alternative to opioid pain medication.

Results from Vertex Pharmaceuticals’ Phase 2 clinical trial show that suzetrigine is essentially no more effective than a placebo in relieving back and hip pain caused by lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR).

After 12 weeks of treatment with suzetrigine, patients with LSR had a 2.02 average reduction in their pain scores on a rating scale of zero to 10. That compares to an average reduction of 1.98 for patients who received a placebo or sham treatment.

Although the difference between 2.02 and 1.98 is statistically meaningless, Vertex claimed the overall findings were “statistically significant and clinically meaningful” in a press release. The company blamed the lackluster results on the placebo effect and the difficulty of treating lumbosacral radiculopathy.

“Suzetrigine has again demonstrated its potential to fill an important unmet need in the treatment of pain,” said Carmen Bozic, MD, Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer at Vertex. “We did not see separation between the suzetrigine and the placebo arms. Yet our post-hoc analyses suggest that this could be due to the high placebo response in this study.”

Despite the disappointing results, Vertex still plans to go ahead with a Phase 3 study of suzetrigine for LSR, while changing the study design to minimize the impact of the placebo.

“Managing the placebo response in pain trials is a complex challenge. We look forward to innovating in clinical trial design, including for the pivotal study, with the aim of bringing a potentially safe and effective treatment to patients suffering from LSR," said Christine Sang, MD, co-chair of Vertex’s Peripheral Neuropathic Pain steering committee and principal investigator of the study.

Suzetrigine is already under consideration by the FDA as a treatment for acute pain, with a decision expected in late January. If approved, suzetrigine would be the first new medication for acute pain in over two decades.

Unlike opioids, suzetrigine blocks pain signals in the peripheral nervous system before they reach the brain. That means it won’t have the “liking” effect that opioids can have in some patients or be as addictive.

Although suzetrigine has been touted as a novel painkiller that "could bring relief to millions” without the risk of addiction, findings from earlier studies have also been mixed. In a Phase 3 trial of patients recovering from minimally invasive surgery, suzetrigine was no more effective than a low dose combination of hydrocodone and acetaminophen, more commonly known as Vicodin.

Although Vertex downplayed the results from the Phase 2 study, shares of the company lost about 15% of their value after last week’s announcement. Wall Street analysts said the Phase 2 findings were “very messy” and "raise considerable risk around suzetrigine's potential.”

Ultimately, it will be up to the FDA to decide whether suzetrigine should be allowed on the market. The agency is under pressure to approve new non-opioid analgesics, so it may look past the disappointing clinical trial findings. If approval is granted in January, it will coincide with implementation of the NOPAIN Act, which will make non-opioid analgesics in outpatient surgical settings eligible for higher Medicare reimbursement rates.  

In addition to acute pain and lumbosacral radiculopathy, Vertex is also studying suzetrigine as a treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

A Medical Enigma I’ll Never Understand

By Pat Akerberg

I recently read Carol Levy’s column describing a medical enigma about a new pain-relieving medication. Carol and I both suffer with the same debilitating condition -- trigeminal neuralgia (TN) – so I was intrigued to learn more about it. Important to note that she has suffered with TN twice as long as I have. Bless you, Carol.

The new medication by Vertex Pharmaceuticals is suzetrigine, which the FDA is fast-tracking with a priority review.  For all the hype, it turns out that suzetrigine is only being studied as a treatment for acute pain and diabetic peripheral neuropathy.  Along with Carol, I had hoped this medication would be something for all of us in pain. Most especially since there hasn’t been any new pain medication for two decades. 

Here’s the medical enigma about the condition we suffer with that I’ll never understand.  Simply put, why can surgeons perform a microvascular decompression (MVD) brain surgery on TN patients when they cannot offer treatment for a bad outcome that might occur (and does 20% of the time)? 

And what happens if the neurosurgeon lies to you before the surgery and falsely claims that he/she can reverse any unwanted outcome? 

As background, I was struck with the lightning bolts of TN in 2009.  Because I wanted to return to work pronto, I chose to have MVD surgery in 2010 that was recommended to halt the horrific pain.  Instead, I wound up being harmed even further by the surgery.

Fast forward to the present, and I’ve been seen by 11 neurologists in my area who were all Ill-equipped to understand TN, let alone how to treat my worsened condition. 

So, I understand the rise of Carol’s hope and excitement about a possible new medication that might help alleviate the neuropathic pain we suffer with. The worst pain known to medical practice is TN, and the idea that using disappointing treatments like Tylenol or suzetrigine for it is truly unfathomable. 

But here’s what else I really don’t understand.  If surgery is allowed for TN, then why is the medical profession unable to deal with the unfortunate, damaging outcomes from it that happen to hundreds of patients like me? 

I’ve been told by neurosurgeons that training in medical schools for TN is woefully lacking.  Yet somehow performing surgeries for TN or other challenging conditions persists, especially for controversial surgeries that don’t have a good track record 6 months later. 

When I asked the neurosurgeon who performed my procedure what went wrong during the surgery, his response was: “No one ever told you that surgery was without risk.”

In other words, “You knew the risk and you chose to do it anyway.” 

Then he told me I should find a psychiatrist since I was so “anxious” about my unfortunate outcome. So much for his emotional intelligence and integrity (or competence for that matter).

Again, who wouldn’t be anxious if they underwent brain surgery thinking they would be rid of the wicked pain, only to wake up in worse pain through no fault of their own?  Imagine my shock afterwards when I learned he lied and couldn’t reverse anything that he claimed he could.

With zero assistance from him, I set out to contact neurological specialists internationally.  When I spoke with a TN neurosurgeon from Israel, he answered the enigma that has bothered me for years.  I’m paraphrasing what he told me, but here’s what he said:

“The United States is cut happy. The U.S. has a medical business model and, as such, they allow surgeries that the rest of the world would never perform given the susceptibility for harm in such a snug, vulnerable brain area.”

WOW.  That explained the run-around I experienced. It also explained why, despite my considerable efforts, I couldn’t get any pain relief (forget justice) for the harmful outcome I suffered with the phantom pain of anesthesia dolorosa.

Then I spoke with several TN experts around the U.S. after sending them my MRI.  Each one told me that since the detrimental outcome of my surgery sensitized my central nervous system, I would no longer be considered “operable” by most TN surgeons anywhere ever. 

Again, WOW.  I really need someone to explain to me why it’s considered okay to perform a risky surgery on someone when there’s no way to treat any disastrous outcome of said surgery.  My experience has been to blame me (the patient) with a neat, tidy self-serving explanation.

I guess it all comes down to how desperate one is to get relief from the pain caused by the “suicide disease.”  That desperation is then exploited with a buyer beware consent document.  

I’ve since learned that consent born out of desperation (or a lie) becomes absolution for the surgeons performing the MVD procedure for TN.  That frees those performing the surgery from their oath to do no harm. 

Here’s the kicker: After having done considerable research, I asked my neurosurgeon if any bad outcome could be reversed later. He answered “yes” in his fervor to ready me for the surgery. So, I signed the consent agreement based on his lie. 

Would you take on doing something that you knew could make a patient’s situation even worse, if you knew beforehand that you couldn’t do anything to correct it if something bad happened?  And who would be responsible if the outcome was bad? You or the patient?  Another enigma.

I guess the neurosurgeon from Israel was right about the American medical business model promoting “cut happy” surgeries that generate significant profits for their operating entities.

Interestingly, I also learned from my situation that conditions like TN are considered so rare that they are often relegated to teaching hospitals to give surgical residents training opportunities.

Even worse, regarding justice in the state of Florida where I live, one cannot sue a surgeon working for a teaching hospital. Why? Because the state owns the teaching hospitals and one cannot sue teaching hospitals owned by the state. Now, there’s a neat, circular wad of unjust enigmas further saddling the patient.

The medical enigmas abound with TN, and I suspect that’s also true with other painful conditions. So, it’s no wonder Carol chose to write about a much needed, yet disappointing pain medication that was fast-tracked to address a huge void in pain management. 

Another medical enigma that I’ll never understand: How is this whole medical approach to supposedly treating pain any different from a fox guarding the hen house?

Pat Akerberg suffers from trigeminal neuralgia, a rare facial pain disorder. Pat is a member of the TNA Facial Pain Association and is a supporter of the Trigeminal Neuralgia Research Foundation.  

Is the Hype About a New Non-Opioid Analgesic Justified?

By Carol Levy

In a previous column, I asked why pharmaceutical companies haven’t been able to “build a better mousetrap” by developing new and effective non-opioid medications for pain 

Every doctor I've seen about my chronic facial pain has only offered me opioids. As is true for many of us, I hate the way they make me feel. They also rarely help, outside of making me so cloudy-headed that I become less aware of the pain and have trouble thinking clearly.

That is the exact opposite of what the drug is supposed to do. It's supposed to make me feel better, and therefore better able to work, play, and do regular activities — which is exactly what the cloudiness stops me from doing. That's not a workable trade-off.

When I protest, “There must be something other than an opioid,” the reply from doctors is always the same: “There is nothing else.”

Now there may be. The FDA is giving priority review to a new drug application for suzetrigine, an experimental non-opioid analgesic developed by Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The drug has previously been granted “Fast Track” and “Breakthrough Therapy” designations by the agency for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain. Final approval could come in January, which would make suzetrigine the first new class of medication for pain in over two decades.

The upside to suzetrigine is that it’s not an opioid. That would address the lie that we are responsible for the opioid crisis, and should be held captive by doctors who fear being raided by the DEA and don’t prescribe opioids anymore.

The downside is that suzetrigine is being considered as a treatment for acute pain and perhaps chronic neuropathy. My pain is neuropathic in nature -- trigeminal neuralgia and anaesthesia dolorosa (phantom pain) --- so I was at first exhilarated, and then deflated to see that suzetrigine is only being studied as a treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathy. I had hoped this would be something for all of us.

I Google searched for other non-opioid analgesics, hoping there might be some new ones in the process of testing or even FDA fast-tracked. I couldn't find any.

As I researched further, I began to feel dejected. All drugs have downsides. That is expected. But I had hoped the FDA’s priority review meant the research was very positive about suzetrigine. Instead, I found there are many questions as to whether the drug is any better than what is already out there.

So why is the FDA fast-tracking it? Are they so eager to approve non-opioids that anything that might work will be considered? Maybe. The breakthrough therapy and fast-track designations may be geared more towards appeasing the FDA’s critics than anything else.

The headlines sounded so promising. “New Painkiller Could Bring Relief to Millions” and “A New Class of Medicine for Pain Relief On The Horizon.”

When I found out about this drug my heart leaped. Now I am not so sure. I hope it's not just another false flag. 

Carol Jay Levy has lived with trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic facial pain disorder, for over 30 years. She is the author of “A Pained Life, A Chronic Pain Journey.”  Carol is the moderator of the Facebook support group “Women in Pain Awareness.” Her blog “The Pained Life” can be found here. 

New Non-Opioid Analgesic Gets Priority Review from FDA

By Pat Anson

The Food and Drug Administration could approve an experimental non-opioid analgesic early next year, potentially making it the first new medication for acute pain in over two decades.

Vertex Pharmaceuticals says the FDA has accepted its New Drug Application for suzetrigine, giving the drug a priority review with a target action date of January 30, 2025. Suzetrigine has previously been granted FDA Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy designations for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain.

“Today’s FDA filing acceptance for suzetrigine marks a critical milestone toward bringing this new, transformative non-opioid analgesic to the millions of patients,” Nia Tatsis, PhD, an Executive Vice President and Chief Regulatory and Quality Officer for Vertex, said in a statement.

“The FDA’s granting of a priority review further reinforces the high unmet need in treating acute pain, and the filing brings us one step closer to our objective of filling the gap between medicines with good tolerability but limited efficacy and opioid medicines with therapeutic efficacy but known risks, including addictive potential.”

Suzetrigine is designed to block pain in the peripheral nervous system, rather than the brain. That means it won’t have the “liking” effects of opioids or be as addictive.  

In Phase 3 clinical studies, suzetrigine was more effective in reducing post-operative pain than a placebo after minimally invasive surgeries.  Over 80% of patients rated suzetrigine as good or excellent in treating acute pain, but it was not more effective than a combination of the opioid hydrocodone and acetaminophen, more commonly known as Vicodin.

Vertex hopes suzetrigine will eventually be approved for a variety of pain conditions, not just post-operative pain.  The company has been studying the drug as a treatment for pain caused by diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

“In my 24 years practicing medicine, I have seen firsthand the desperate need for new non-opioid therapies for treating pain. Too many people today are either undertreated, dealing with negative side effects of currently available therapies or foregoing pain medications altogether for fear of becoming dependent on opioids,” said Scott Weiner, MD, a Vertex consultant and Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine at Harvard Medical School.

The Biden Administration has been under pressure from lobbyists, politicians and anti-opioid activists to have the FDA approve more non-opioid medications like suzetrigine. The new analgesics are expected to be far more expensive than opioids and other older pain relievers.

If the FDA approves suzetrigine in January, it will coincide with implementation of the NOPAIN Act, which will expand access to non-opioid analgesics in outpatient surgical settings by making them eligible for higher Medicare reimbursement rates.