Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Aarhus University1, French Institute of Health and Medical Research2, Washington University in St. Louis3, Tufts Medical Center4, University of Rochester5, Queen's University6, Helsinki University Central Hospital7, Oslo University Hospital8, Karolinska Institutet9, Aarhus University Hospital10, University of the Witwatersrand11, Churchill Hospital12, Johns Hopkins University13, Imperial College London14, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust15, California Pacific Medical Center16, University of Edinburgh17, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health18, University of Sydney19, Greenwich Hospital20, University of Dundee21, University of California, San Diego22
TL;DR: The results support a revision of the NeuPSIG recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain and allow a strong recommendation for use and proposal as first-line treatment in neuropathicPain for tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and gabapentin.
Abstract: Summary Background New drug treatments, clinical trials, and standards of quality for assessment of evidence justify an update of evidence-based recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and E valuation (GRADE), we revised the Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain (NeuPSIG) recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain based on the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Between April, 2013, and January, 2014, NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind studies of oral and topical pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January , 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies. We used number needed to treat (NNT) for 50% pain relief as a primary measure and assessed publication bias; NNT was calculated with the fi xed-eff ects Mantel-Haenszel method. Findings 229 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of publication bias suggested a 10% overstatement of treatment eff ects. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater eff ects than did unpublished studies (r² 9·3%, p=0·009). T rial outcomes were generally modest: in particular, combined NNTs were 6·4 (95% CI 5·2–8·4) for serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, mainly including duloxetine (nine of 14 studies); 7·7 (6·5–9·4) for pregabalin; 7·2 (5·9–9·21) for gabapentin, including gabapentin extended release and enacarbil; and 10·6 (7·4–19·0) for capsaicin high-concentration patches. NNTs were lower for tricyclic antidepressants, strong opioids, tramadol, and botulinum toxin A, and undetermined for lidocaine patches. Based on GRADE, fi nal quality of evidence was moderate or high for all treatments apart from lidocaine patches; tolerability and safety, and values and preferences were higher for topical drugs; and cost was lower for tricyclic antidepressants and tramadol. These fi ndings permitted a strong recommendation for use and proposal as fi rst-line treatment in neuropathic pain for tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and gabapentin; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as second line for lidocaine patches, capsaicin high-concentration patches, and tramadol; and a weak recommendation for use and proposal as third line for strong opioids and botulinum toxin A. Topical agents and botulinum toxin A are recommended for peripheral neuropathic pain only. Interpretation Our results support a revision of the NeuPSIG recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain. Inadequate response to drug treatments constitutes a substantial unmet need in patients with neuropathic pain. Modest effi cacy, large placebo responses, heterogeneous diagnostic criteria, and poor phenotypic profi ling probably account for moderate trial outcomes and should be taken into account in future studies. Funding NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors discuss different objective and subjective methods for the characterization of neuropathic pain, and the gaps and proposals for an integral management of chronic neuropathic symptoms are discussed.
5 citations
TL;DR: A high-concentration capsaicin 179-mg cutaneous patch (Qutenza™) is licensed in adults for chronic neuropathic pain in the EU, and neuropathic symptoms with post-herpetic neuralgia and diabetic peripheral neuropathy in the USA.
Abstract: Introduction The use of topical agents has been suggested for post-surgical neuropathic pain. A high-concentration capsaicin 179-mg cutaneous patch (Qutenza™) is licensed in adults for chronic neuropathic pain in the EU, and neuropathic pain with post-herpetic neuralgia and neuropathic pain with diabetic peripheral neuropathy in the USA. This article aims to describe the use of a topical capsaicin 179-mg cutaneous patch in the treatment of PSNP. Area covered : This narrative review presents the relevant clinical aspects of the use of a topical capsaicin 179-mg cutaneous patch for the treatment of post-surgical neuropathic pain (PSNP). Randomized control trials, observational studies, case series and reports investigating the clinical use of the capsaicin patch were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ROAD databases. Trials from citation lists of reviewed articles and hand-searching were added. The search concluded in September 2020. 10/20 articles were considered. Expert opinion : Some clinical studies demonstrated the efficacy of the capsaicin 179-mg patch in PSNP as monotherapy and concomitant treatment with oral treatments. This topical treatment of PSNP is better tolerated and accepted compared with systemic treatments. To maximize the effectiveness of the treatment, correct administration recommendations should be followed.
5 citations
TL;DR: This a priori statistical analysis plan provides detailed methodology for the analysis of the PRECISE study, which aims to deliver much needed evidence about effective and affordable management of sciatica.
Abstract: Sciatica is a severe, disabling condition that lacks high quality evidence for effective treatment strategies. This a priori statistical analysis plan describes the methodology of analysis for the PRECISE study. PRECISE is a prospectively registered, double blind, randomised placebo controlled trial of pregabalin compared to placebo, in addition to usual care in patients with sciatica. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pregabalin in reducing leg pain intensity (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes include disability (key secondary), back pain intensity, quality of life, participants’ perceived global effect, work absenteeism and health utilisation. Information about medication usage and tolerability are also collected. Outcomes are collected over one year (weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52). Double data entry will be conducted for primary and key secondary outcomes. Other outcomes will be checked using a risk-based approach. Analyses will be consistent with the intention-to-treat principle. Statistical tests will be two-tailed with a p value <0.05 considered significant. Group allocation will remain masked until analyses and interpretation are finalised. Repeated-measure linear mixed models will assess the effect of treatment (pregabalin versus placebo) on primary and secondary outcomes at all time points. Fixed effects will include group allocation, visit as a categorical variable and the interaction between group and visit. Covariates will include baseline leg pain and symptom duration, with an interaction term between baseline leg pain and visit. Pairwise differences between groups will be tested at weeks 8 and 52. The number of serious adverse events and adverse events will be reported, and the proportion of patients per group who have at least one event will be compared using Fisher’s exact test. An economic evaluation will be conducted if there is a treatment effect on the primary outcome at week 8. A subgroup analysis will assess whether presenting features of neuropathic pain at baseline modify the treatment effect of leg pain at week 8. This statistical analysis plan provides detailed methodology for the analysis of the PRECISE study, which aims to deliver much needed evidence about effective and affordable management of sciatica. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (
ACTRN12613000530729
. Registered 13 May 2013)
5 citations
Cites background from "Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pai..."
...There is limited high quality evidence for effective, conservative treatment strategies for patients with sciatica [1]....
[...]
TL;DR: The results suggest that Ca1a is a novel neurotoxin against VGSCs and has a potential to be developed as a novel analgesic.
Abstract: Human genetic and pharmacological studies have demonstrated that voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSCs) are promising therapeutic targets for the treatment of pain. Spider venom contains many toxins that modulate the activity of VGSCs. To date, only 0.01% of such spider toxins has been explored, and thus there is a great potential for discovery of novel VGSC modulators as useful pharmacological tools or potential therapeutics. In the current study, we identified a novel peptide, µ-TRTX-Ca1a (Ca1a), in the venom of the tarantula Cyriopagopus albostriatus. This peptide consisted of 38 residues, including 6 cysteines, i.e. IFECSISCEIEKEGNGKKCKPKKCKGGWKCKFNICVKV. In HEK293T or ND7/23 cells expressing mammalian VGSCs, this peptide exhibited the strongest inhibitory activity on Nav1.7 (IC50 378 nM), followed by Nav1.6 (IC50 547 nM), Nav1.2 (IC50 728 nM), Nav1.3 (IC50 2.2 µM) and Nav1.4 (IC50 3.2 µM), and produced negligible inhibitory effect on Nav1.5, Nav1.8, and Nav1.9, even at high concentrations of up to 10 µM. Furthermore, this peptide did not significantly affect the activation and inactivation of Nav1.7. Using site-directed mutagenesis of Nav1.7 and Nav1.4, we revealed that its binding site was localized to the DIIS3-S4 linker region involving the D816 and E818 residues. In three different mouse models of pain, pretreatment with Cala (100, 200, 500 µg/kg) dose-dependently suppressed the nociceptive responses induced by formalin, acetic acid or heat. These results suggest that Ca1a is a novel neurotoxin against VGSCs and has a potential to be developed as a novel analgesic.
5 citations
TL;DR: These results challenge the presumption that these chemotherapy-dosing regimens are sufficient to model clinically relevant CINP in rats and produce sustained or morphine-reversible behavioral depression in rats.
Abstract: Objective: Chemotherapies of varying classes often cause neuropathy and debilitating chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain (CINP) sufficient to limit treatment and reduce quality of life for many patients battling cancer. There are currently no effective preventative or alleviative treatments for CINP. Preclinical models have been developed to test candidate CINP treatments; however, studies using these models rarely provide direct comparisons of effects of different chemotherapies or assess the degree to which chemotherapies produce clinically relevant signs of pain-depressed behavior.
Methods: Male and female Sprague-Dawley rats received four injections of vehicle, paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, vincristine, or bortezomib on alternate days. Mechanical hypersensitivity, body weight, and food-maintained operant responding were evaluated before, during, and for up to 42 days after initiation of treatment. Morphine potency and effectiveness to reverse chemotherapy-induced effects were also evaluated.
Results: All four chemotherapies produced dose-dependent and sustained mechanical hypersensitivity in all rats. Vincristine and oxaliplatin produced transient weight loss and decreases in food-maintained operant responding in all rats, whereas paclitaxel and bortezomib produced lesser or no effect. At four weeks after treatment, operant responding was depressed only in paclitaxel-treated males. Morphine reversed mechanical hypersensitivity in all rats but failed to reverse paclitaxel-induced depression of operant responding in males.
Conclusions: Chemotherapy treatments sufficient to produce sustained mechanical hypersensitivity failed to produce sustained or morphine-reversible behavioral depression in rats. Insofar as pain-related behavioral depression is a cardinal sign of CINP in humans, these results challenge the presumption that these chemotherapy-dosing regimens are sufficient to model clinically relevant CINP in rats.
5 citations
Cites background from "Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pai..."
...At present, there are no adequate treatments to prevent or reverse chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, CINP, or painrelated functional impairment (Dworkin et al., 2010; Finnerup et al., 2015)....
[...]
...At present, there are no adequate treatments to prevent or reverse chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, CINP, or pain-related functional impairment (Dworkin et al., 2010; Finnerup et al., 2015)....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: Moher et al. as mentioned in this paper introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which is used in this paper.
Abstract: David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
62,157 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) as mentioned in this paper was developed to address the suboptimal reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care. Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field,1,2 and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical practice guidelines. Granting agencies may require a systematic review to ensure there is justification for further research,3 and some health care journals are moving in this direction.4 As with all research, the value of a systematic review depends on what was done, what was found, and the clarity of reporting. As with other publications, the reporting quality of systematic reviews varies, limiting readers' ability to assess the strengths and weaknesses of those reviews.
Several early studies evaluated the quality of review reports. In 1987, Mulrow examined 50 review articles published in 4 leading medical journals in 1985 and 1986 and found that none met all 8 explicit scientific criteria, such as a quality assessment of included studies.5 In 1987, Sacks and colleagues6 evaluated the adequacy of reporting of 83 meta-analyses on 23 characteristics in 6 domains. Reporting was generally poor; between 1 and 14 characteristics were adequately reported (mean = 7.7; standard deviation = 2.7). A 1996 update of this study found little improvement.7
In 1996, to address the suboptimal reporting of meta-analyses, an international group developed a guidance called the QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses), which focused on the reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.8 In this article, we summarize a revision of these guidelines, renamed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), which have been updated to address several conceptual and practical advances in the science of systematic reviews (Box 1).
Box 1
Conceptual issues in the evolution from QUOROM to PRISMA
46,935 citations
TL;DR: Funnel plots, plots of the trials' effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials.
Abstract: Objective: Funnel plots (plots of effect estimates against sample size) may be useful to detect bias in meta-analyses that were later contradicted by large trials. We examined whether a simple test of asymmetry of funnel plots predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared to large trials, and we assessed the prevalence of bias in published meta-analyses. Design: Medline search to identify pairs consisting of a meta-analysis and a single large trial (concordance of results was assumed if effects were in the same direction and the meta-analytic estimate was within 30% of the trial); analysis of funnel plots from 37 meta-analyses identified from a hand search of four leading general medicine journals 1993-6 and 38 meta-analyses from the second 1996 issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews . Main outcome measure: Degree of funnel plot asymmetry as measured by the intercept from regression of standard normal deviates against precision. Results: In the eight pairs of meta-analysis and large trial that were identified (five from cardiovascular medicine, one from diabetic medicine, one from geriatric medicine, one from perinatal medicine) there were four concordant and four discordant pairs. In all cases discordance was due to meta-analyses showing larger effects. Funnel plot asymmetry was present in three out of four discordant pairs but in none of concordant pairs. In 14 (38%) journal meta-analyses and 5 (13%) Cochrane reviews, funnel plot asymmetry indicated that there was bias. Conclusions: A simple analysis of funnel plots provides a useful test for the likely presence of bias in meta-analyses, but as the capacity to detect bias will be limited when meta-analyses are based on a limited number of small trials the results from such analyses should be treated with considerable caution. Key messages Systematic reviews of randomised trials are the best strategy for appraising evidence; however, the findings of some meta-analyses were later contradicted by large trials Funnel plots, plots of the trials9 effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials Funnel plot asymmetry was found in 38% of meta-analyses published in leading general medicine journals and in 13% of reviews from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Critical examination of systematic reviews for publication and related biases should be considered a routine procedure
37,989 citations
TL;DR: An instrument to assess the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in pain research is described and its use to determine the effect of rater blinding on the assessments of quality is described.
15,740 citations
TL;DR: The advantages of the GRADE system are explored, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide and which is often praised for its high level of consistency.
Abstract: Guidelines are inconsistent in how they rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. This article explores the advantages of the GRADE system, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide
13,324 citations