Pilot evaluation of scrambler therapy for pain induced by bone and visceral metastases and refractory to standard therapies

The impact of scrambler therapy on pain and quality of life for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a debilitating disturbance among patients who received chemotherapy, with no effective treatment available. Scrambler therapy (ST) is a noninvasive treatment capable of improving multiple quality-of-life symptoms beyond pain. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ST for pain and nonpain symptoms related to CIPN.

METHODS

Ten patients with moderate to severe CIPN symptoms for >3 months were enrolled in a single-arm trial of ST for 10 daily sessions. CIPN-related symptoms were measured throughout the treatment period and up to 6 months thereafter.

RESULTS

The worst pain was reduced by 6 months (p = 0.0039). QST demonstrated the greatest improvement in pressure of 60 g (p = 0.308, Cohen's d = 0.42) and cold temperature threshold of 2.5°C (p = 0.9375, Cohen's d = 0.51) in the gastrocnemius area. Symptoms of numbness, tingling, trouble walking, and disturbed sleep had significant improvements at 6 months. Pain medication use decreased by 70% at the end of treatment and by 42% at 6 months. Patient satisfaction was high (82%) and no adverse events with ST treatment were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pilot trial support the use of ST by demonstrating improvement in multiple domains of quality of life for CIPN patients during an extended follow-up of 6 months. However, further large-scale studies are needed to confirm our findings.

The Use of Scrambler Therapy in Treating Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Scrambler therapy (ST) is a noninvasive method of transcutaneous neuromodulation that has 510(K) clearance from the United States Food and Drug Administration for treating acute pain, postoperative pain, and intractable chronic pain. Since its inception, ST has been used to treat many chronic pain syndromes in a variety of patient populations. We synthesized the available literature for ST to delineate its overall evidence basis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review based on conventional Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses methods by surveying multiple data sources from January 1950 through October 2021. Two review authors, independently and in a standardized, unblinded fashion, conducted a systematic review to identify relevant studies and extract the necessary outcome measures. A conservative search strategy was implemented to identify all ST studies for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes. Primary outcome parameters collected were analgesic benefit, adverse effects, and other metrics such as sensorimotor testing.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies met the final criteria for study inclusion and comprised randomized controlled trials (n = 8), prospective observational studies (n = 10), and retrospective cohort studies (n = 3). Nearly all the reported studies explored the use of ST for the treatment of neuropathic pain, with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy being the most studied condition. Most studies were limited by small cohorts but reported ST being safe, well tolerated, and providing clinically meaningful pain reduction. The duration of posttreatment follow-up ranged from ten to 14 days (concordant with completion of typical ST protocols) to three months. Secondary benefits such as medication reduction and improvement of sensory and motor symptoms were noted by some studies.

CONCLUSIONS

ST is regarded as a safe intervention with potential for significant analgesic benefit for neuropathic pain conditions. Although the available evidence is most robust for treating chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, ST has also been shown to be effective in treating other neuropathic pain syndromes. Evidence for ST use in nociceptive pain conditions is limited but appears promising. The favorable safety profile and increasing evidence basis for ST warrant more extensive recognition and consideration for use in clinical care.

Safety of Scrambler Therapy: A Systematic Review of Complications and Adverse Effects

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to qualitatively synthesize all reported cases of complications, adverse effects, side effects, or harms arising from the use of scrambler therapy (ST).

METHODS AND DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, United States National Library of Medicine clinical trials registry, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from database inception to December 10, 2021. Case reports/series, abstracts, retrospective studies, and prospective studies (e.g., open-label trials, randomized controlled trials) pertaining to ST and any description of a complication, adverse effect, side effect, or harm were screened. The search protocol was developed a priori and registered via the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021291838).

RESULTS

A total of six RCTs, 19 prospective open-label trials, and 11 case series / case reports met the inclusion criteria, comprising 1,152 total patients. Two patients experienced contact dermatitis, and one patient reported minor ecchymosis that resolved without intervention. This yielded a composite complication rate of 0.26% (3/1,152). There were zero reported serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

When used in accordance with the treatment protocols described by the United States Food and Drug Administration and device manual, ST is associated with a reported composite complication rate that is orders of magnitude lower than those of invasive neuromodulation devices. ST neuromodulation is a safe alternative for patients who cannot undergo invasive neuromodulation device implantation because of either risk or preference.

Scrambler therapy for noncancer neuropathic pain: a focused review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Therapeutic methods for neuropathic are limited; available drugs can be inadequate or have adverse effects that compromise quality of life. Interest has grown in alternatives to pharmacologic therapy for neuropathic pain. We present a focused review of the literature about the relatively novel noninvasive, nonpharmacologic electrocutaneous nerve stimulation technique called scrambler therapy for treating noncancer neuropathic pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Neuromodulation techniques targeting peripheral sites have changed rapidly in recent years. Several clinical studies have demonstrated the analgesic effect of scrambler therapy after 10 sessions of treatment for various types of pain. Although scrambler therapy was originally used for cancer pain, its indications have broadened to postoperative pain, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, low back pain, diabetic neuropathy, complex regional pain syndrome and central pain syndrome. That said, some of the studies are controversial owing to their small sample size, lack of appropriate scrambler therapy protocol and possible lack of experience of the operators.

SUMMARY

We present the historical perspective, mechanism of action and trial outcomes of scrambler therapy, representing an avenue for managing neuropathic pain without drugs. Well designed phase II/III clinical trials must be conducted to confirm the positive findings reported using scrambler therapy technology. If validated, scrambler therapy could be a game changer.

Scrambler therapy for incident pain in bone metastases

Incident pain, described as pain induced by bone metastasis and produced by movement, can be devastating. The high doses of opioids needed to control such pain may sedate the patient and cause additional complications. Treatment of incident pain with pharmaceuticals has rarely been studied; only eight patients have been reported in the literature who did not receive additional opioids. We present the case of a 69 year old man with shoulder destruction due to bone metastases who was able to use his arm for normal activities without pain after three sessions of scrambler therapy, a noninvasive form of electrical neuromodulation that requires further study.

Scrambler therapy improves pain in neuromyelitis optica: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether Scrambler therapy is an effective, acceptable, and feasible treatment of persistent central neuropathic pain in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) and to explore the effect of Scrambler therapy on co-occurring symptoms.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized single-blind, sham-controlled trial in patients with NMOSD who have central neuropathic pain using Scrambler therapy for 10 consecutive weekdays. Pain severity, pain interference, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance were assessed at baseline, at the end of treatment, and at the 30- and 60-day follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients (11 per arm) were enrolled in and completed this trial. The median baseline numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score decreased from 5.0 to 1.5 after 10 days of treatment with Scrambler therapy, whereas the median NRS score did not significantly decrease in the sham arm. Depression was also reduced in the treatment arm, and anxiety was decreased in a subset of patients who responded to treatment. These symptoms were not affected in the sham arm. The safety profiles were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Scrambler therapy is an effective, feasible, and safe intervention for central neuropathic pain in patients with NMOSD. Decreasing pain with Scrambler therapy may additionally improve depression and anxiety.

CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03452176.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class II evidence that Scrambler therapy significantly reduces pain in patients with NMOSD and persistent central neuropathic pain.

Scrambler therapy: A ray of hope for refractory chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

Scrambler therapy (ST) is a novel noninvasive modality for treatment of chronic neuropathic and cancer pain using 5 artificial neurons. The principle with Scrambler Therapy is that synthetic "non-pain" information is transmitted by C fiber surface receptors. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy can markedly deteriorate patient's quality of life and can also negatively affect compliance with the anticancer treatment. Chronic neuropathic pain presents a therapeutic challenge if resistant to pharmacological management opioids and other types of treatments. We have described here successful use of scrambler therapy in three cases of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy.

Scrambler therapy for chemotherapy neuropathy: a randomized phase II pilot trial

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prominent clinical problem, with limited effective therapies. Preliminary non-randomized clinical trial data support that Scrambler Therapy is helpful in this situation.

METHODS

Patients were eligible if they had CIPN symptoms for at least 3 months and CIPN-related tingling or pain at least 4/10 in severity during the week prior to registration. They were randomized to receive Scrambler Therapy versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for 2 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were utilized to measure efficacy and toxicity daily for 2 weeks during therapy and then weekly for 8 additional weeks.

RESULTS

This study accrued 50 patients, 25 to each of the 2 study arms; 46 patients were evaluable. There were twice as many Scrambler-treated patients who had at least a 50% documented improvement during the 2 treatment weeks, from their baseline pain, tingling, and numbness scores, when compared with the TENS-treated patients (from 36 to 56% compared with 16-28% for each symptom). Global Impression of Change scores for "neuropathy symptoms," pain, and quality of life were similarly improved during the treatment weeks. Patients in the Scrambler group were more likely than those in the TENS group to recommend their treatment to other patients, during both the 2-week treatment period and the 8-week follow-up period (p < 0.0001). Minimal toxicity was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this pilot trial were positive, supporting the conduct of further investigations regarding the use of Scrambler Therapy for treating CIPN.

Strategies of complementary and integrative therapies in cancer-related pain-attaining exhaustive cancer pain management

PURPOSE

Complementary integrative therapies (CITs) correspond to growing demand in patients with cancer-related pain. This demand needs to be considered alongside pharmaceutical and/or interventional therapies. CITs can be used to cover certain specific pain-related characteristics. The objective of this review is to present the options for CITs that could be used within dynamic, multidisciplinary, and personalized management, leading to an integrative oncology approach.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most CITs only showed trends in efficacy as cancer pain was mainly a secondary endpoint, or populations were restricted. Physical therapy has demonstrated efficacy in motion and pain, in some specific cancers (head and neck or breast cancers) or in treatments sequelae (lymphedema). In cancer survivors, higher levels of physical activity decrease pain intensity. Due to the multimorphism of cancer pain, certain mind-body therapies acting on anxiety, stress, depression, or mood disturbances (such as massage, acupuncture, healing touch, hypnosis, and music therapy) are efficient on cancer pain. Other mind-body therapies have shown trends in reducing the severity of cancer pain and improving other parameters, and they include education (with coping skills training), yoga, tai chi/qigong, guided imagery, virtual reality, and cognitive-behavioral therapy alone or combined. The outcome sustainability of most CITs is still questioned.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality clinical trials should be conducted with CITs, as their efficacy on pain is mainly based on efficacy trends in pain severity, professional judgment, and patient preferences. Finally, the implementation of CITs requires an interdisciplinary team approach to offer optimal, personalized, cancer pain management.

A Pilot Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial of MC5-A Scrambler Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN)

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) affects 30% to 40% of patients with cancer with long-lasting disability. Scrambler therapy (ST) appeared to benefit patients in uncontrolled trials, so we performed a randomized sham-controlled Phase II trial of ST.

METHODS

The primary end point was "average pain" after 28 days on the Numeric Rating Scale. Each received ten 30-minute sessions of ST on the dermatomes above the painful areas, or sham treatment on the back, typically at L3-5 where the nerve roots would enter the spinal cord. Outcomes included the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)-CIPN and the EORTC CIPN-20 scale. Patients were evaluated before treatment (day 0), day 10, and days 28, 60, and 90.

RESULTS

Data regarding pain as a primary outcome were collected for 33 of the 35 patients. There were no significant differences between the sham and the "real" ST group at day 10, 28, 60, or 90, for average pain, the BPI, or EORTC CIPN-20. Individual responses were noted during the ST treatment on the real arm, but most dissipated by day 30. There was improvement in the sensory subscale of the CIPN-20 at 2 months in the "real" group (P = .14). All "real" patients wanted to continue treatment if available.

DISCUSSION

We observed no difference between sham and real ST CIPN treatment. Potential reasons include at least the following: ST does not work; the sham treatment had some effect; small sample size with heterogeneous patients; misplaced electrodes on an area of nonpainful but damaged nerves; or a combination of these factors.

Inside the Scrambler Therapy, a Noninvasive Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic and Cancer Pain: From the Gate Control Theory to the Active Principle of Information

Scrambler therapy (ST) is an electro-analgesia therapy for the noninvasive treatment of chronic neuropathic and cancer pain based on a new generation of medical device that uses 5 artificial neurons and is based on a novel theoretical model the differs from gate control theory. The active principle with Scrambler Therapy is such that synthetic "non-pain" information is transmitted by C fiber surface receptors. This is a different theoretical mechanism than the traditional electric stimulation of A-Beta fibers to produce paresthesia and/or block the conduction of nerve fibers to produce an analgesic effect, that is, via TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) machines. Scrambler therapy was developed to treat chronic neuropathic pain and cancer pain resistant to opioids and other types of treatments. The goal of Scrambler Therapy is to eliminate pain during treatment and allow for long-lasting analgesia after a series of 10 to 12 consecutive treatments performed over a 2-week period. The aim of this review is to clarify the underlying theory of Scrambler Therapy and describe the appropriate usage method that maximizes its effectiveness while reducing bias and deepen the explanation of the artificial neuron technology associated with Scrambler Therapy.

Scrambler therapy: what's new after 15 years? The results from 219 patients treated for chronic pain

Chronic pain is often difficult to treat, requiring a comprehensive multidisciplinary therapeutic intervention and a high level of management expertise.This is particularly true for patients who are unresponsive to standard treatments for chronic pain, for which Scrambler Therapy (ST) is indicated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of ST on patient-reported moderate to severe chronic pain.This was a prospective trial on 219 patients affected by chronic pain from April 2010 to March 2016. The study consisted of 2 consecutive weeks of treatment with ST (one 30-min daily session, 5 days a week) (T0, T1, T2) and a 2-week follow-up (T3, T4). Patients were asked to describe the pain using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) immediately prior to and after the treatment.Two hundred nineteen patients were treated for chronic pain of different nature with mean values of 6.44 (± 2.11) at T0, 3.22 (± 2.20) at T2, and 3.19 (± 2.34) at T4. A reduction in the symptomatology from T0 to T2 was maintained throughout T4 (P value < .0001). Of the 219 patients treated with ST, 83 (37.9%) had cancer pain and 136 (62.1%) had non-cancer pain. No adverse events were reported.Future research should focus on individual response, retreatment, and maintenance therapy. The data showed a statistically significant impact of ST, which was maintained during follow-up, on patients suffering from chronic pain of different nature.

Scrambler therapy efficacy and safety for neuropathic pain correlated with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in adolescents: A preliminary study

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common side effect of chemotherapy, in need of effective treatment. Preliminary data support the efficacy of scrambler therapy (ST), a noninvasive cutaneous electrostimulation device, in adults with CIPN. We test the efficacy, safety, and durability of ST for neuropathic pain in adolescents with CIPN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied nine pediatric patients with cancer and CIPN who received ST for pain control. Each patient received 45-min daily sessions for 10 consecutive days as a first step, but some of them required additional treatment.

RESULTS

Pain significantly improved comparing Numeric Rate Scale after 10 days of ST (9.22 ± 0.83 vs. 2.33 ± 2.34; P < 0.001) and at the end of the optimized cycle (EOC) (9.22 ± 0.83 vs. 0.11 ± 0.33, P < 0.001). The improvement in quality of life was significantly reached on pain interference with general activity (8.67 ± 1.66 vs. 3.33 ± 2.12, P < 0.0001), mood (8.33 ± 3.32 vs. 2.78 ± 2.82, P < 0.0005), walking ability (10.00 vs. 2.78 ± 1.22, P < 0.0001), sleep (7.56 ± 2.24 vs. 2.67 ± 1.41, P < 0.001), and relations with people (7.89 ± 2.03 vs. 2.11 ± 2.03, P < 0.0002; Lansky score 26.7 ± 13.2 vs. 10 days of ST 57.8 ± 13.9, P < 0.001; 26.7 ± 13.2 vs. EOC 71.1 ± 16.2, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on these preliminary data, ST could be a good choice for adolescents with CIPN for whom pain control is difficult. ST caused total relief or dramatic reduction in CIPN pain and an improvement in quality of life, durable in follow-up. It caused no detected side effects, and can be retrained successfully. Further larger studies should be performed to confirm our promising preliminary data in pediatric patients with cancer.

Recent advances in understanding and managing cancer pain

Cancer pain remains a significant clinical problem worldwide. Causes of cancer pain are multifactorial and complex and are likely to vary with an array of tumor-related and host-related factors and processes. Pathophysiology is poorly understood; however, new laboratory research points to cross-talk between cancer cells and host’s immune and neural systems as an important potential mechanism that may be broadly relevant to many cancer pain syndromes. Opioids remain the most effective pharmaceuticals used in the treatment of cancer pain. However, their role has been evolving due to emerging awareness of risks of chronic opioid therapy. Despite extensive research efforts, no new class of analgesics has been developed. However, many potential therapeutic targets that may lead to the establishment of new pharmaceuticals have been identified in recent years. It is also expected that the role of non-pharmacological modalities of treatment will grow in prominence. Specifically, neuromodulation, a rapidly expanding field, may play a major role in the treatment of neuropathic cancer pain provided that further technological progress permits the development of non-invasive and inexpensive neuromodulation techniques.

Impact of Scrambler Therapy on Pain Management and Quality of Life in Cancer Patients: A Study of Twenty Cases

Aim of the Study:

To study the effect of scrambler therapy on patients with chronic cancer pain.

Materials and Methods:

This is a prospective, observational study conducted on patients with chronic pain due to malignancy which is not responding to oral analgesics. A total of twenty patients were included in the study (ten males, ten females) with a visual analog scale score of >4 on oral analgesics. Patients aged 18–70 years with a life expectancy of >3 months having bony, neuropathic, or mixed type of pain were included in the study. A total of 12 sessions of scrambler therapy were planned, ten sessions on consecutive days and one session each on two follow-up visits after 1 week each. Each session lasted for 40 min. Pain relief and quality of life according to the World Health Organization Quality of Life were recorded as primary outcome variables.

Results:

All patients had good pain relief and improvement in all four domains of quality of life. Pain scores decreased significantly (P < 0.01) after each session and at each follow-up. Patients showed significant improvement in physical, psychological, social, and environmental health (P < 0.01) after the therapy.

Conclusion:

Scrambler therapy offers a promising role in the pain physician's armamentarium as an adjunct to pharmacological therapy for the treatment of chronic drug-resistant cancer pain; it may bring down analgesic drug requirements significantly and improve quality of life in cancer patients. Larger prospective, randomized multicenter studies are needed to validate the findings of the small pilot studies published in literature so far.

Scrambler Therapy for the management of chronic pain

PURPOSE

Chronic pain is a widespread and debilitating condition, encountered by physicians in a variety of practice settings. Although many pharmacologic and behavioral strategies exist for the management of this condition, treatment is often unsatisfactory. Scrambler Therapy is a novel, non-invasive pain modifying technique that utilizes trans-cutaneous electrical stimulation of pain fibers with the intent of re-organizing maladaptive signaling pathways. This review was conducted to further evaluate what is known regarding the mechanisms and mechanics of Scrambler Therapy and to investigate the preliminary data pertaining to the efficacy of this treatment modality.

METHODS

The PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched for all articles published on Scrambler Therapy prior to November 2015. All case studies and clinical trials were evaluated and reported in a descriptive manner.

RESULTS

To date, 20 reports, of varying scientific quality, have been published regarding this device; all but one small study, published only as an abstract, provided results that appear positive.

CONCLUSION

The positive findings from preliminary studies with Scrambler Therapy support that this device provides benefit for patients with refractory pain syndromes. Larger, randomized studies are required to further evaluate the efficacy of this approach.

Use of Scrambler Therapy in Acute Paediatric Pain: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

We report our clinical experience on the effect of Scrambler Therapy (ST) for a child with acute mixed pain refractory to pharmacological treatment. ST, recently proposed as an alternative treatment for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, is a noninvasive approach to relieve pain, by changing pain perception at brain level. It is safe and has no side effects. Further research is needed to assess its efficacy for acute pain and for paediatric population.