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pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January , 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies.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 Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater eff ects than did unpublished studies (r² 9·3%, p=0·009).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: Treatment with capsaicin 8% led to pain relief without tolerance development and improved flexibility in the affected body area and may represent an effective therapeutic alternative for patients suffering from refractory neuropathic pain.
Abstract: A 62-year-old female patient with a history of mastectomy surgery and sentinel lymphadenectomy in the context of breast cancer therapy was referred to our clinic for the treatment of refractory neuropathic pain She reported a complex set of symptoms including burning and electrical-like sensations as well as profound hyperesthesia, hyperalgesia, and allodynia The symptoms persisted chronically over months with a strong intensity and did not sufficiently respond to oral pain medication and co-analgetics, that is, tapentadol and pregabalin As the patient could hardly move her right upper arm due to the pain, the quality of life was greatly reduced In addition, the patient reported pain-related anxiety and depression Therefore, a therapy with capsaicin 8% patch was initiated Treatment with capsaicin 8% led to pain relief without tolerance development and improved flexibility in the affected body area Despite significant pain relief, previous oral pain medications (tapentadol, pregabalin) as well as the anti-depressant amitriptyline were maintained to fully resolve pain symptoms, anxiety, and depression In conclusion, capsaicin 8% may represent an effective therapeutic alternative for patients suffering from refractory neuropathic pain
2 citations
TL;DR: To the authors' knowledge, this represents the first report of Scrambler therapy or an implanted intrathecal drug delivery system used for a patient with refractory amyloidosis-related neuropathic pain, resulting in substantial analgesic benefit and improved quality of life.
2 citations
Additional excerpts
...According to the most recent recommendations from the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Society for the Study of Pain for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain, strong opioids are considered third-line agents with a weak recommendation for use.(24) However, it must be noted that this recommendation is driven largely by safety concerns, as strong opioids have moderate quality of evidence for neuropathic pain states according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation classification....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper , a review of the physiology of the glutamatergic system in neuropathic pain, the preclinical evidence for dysregulation of glutamate transport in animal pain models, and emerging novel therapies that modulate glutamate transporters.
Abstract: Neuropathic pain, a disease of the somatosensory nervous system, afflicts many individuals and adequate management with current pharmacotherapies remains elusive. The glutamatergic system of neurons, receptors and transporters are intimately involved in pain but, to date, there have been few drugs developed that therapeutically modulate this system. Glutamate transporters, or excitatory amino acid transporters (EAATs), remove excess glutamate around pain transmitting neurons to decrease nociception suggesting that the modulation of glutamate transporters may represent a novel approach to the treatment of pain. This review highlights and summarizes (1) the physiology of the glutamatergic system in neuropathic pain, (2) the preclinical evidence for dysregulation of glutamate transport in animal pain models, and (3) emerging novel therapies that modulate glutamate transporters. Successful drug discovery requires continuous focus on basic and translational methods to fully elucidate the etiologies of this disease to enable the development of targeted therapies. Increasing the efficacy of astrocytic EAATs may serve as a new way to successfully treat those suffering from this devastating disease.
2 citations
TL;DR: The results suggest that disinhibition may contribute to pain related to movement in IA, and are presented to assess movement-induced pain-related behaviour changes in a rodent IA model.
Abstract: Objectives Alterations beyond joint inflammation such as changes in dorsal horn (DH) excitability contribute to pain in inflammatory arthritis (IA). More complete understanding of specific underlying mechanisms will be important to define novel targets for the treatment of IA pain. Pre-clinical models are useful, but relevant pain assays are vital for successful clinical translation. For this purpose, a method is presented to assess movement-induced pain-related behaviour changes that was subsequently used to investigate DH disinhibition in IA. Methods IA was induced by intra-articular injection of complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) in male rats, and weight distribution was assessed before and after walking on a treadmill. To confirm increased activity in nociception-related pathways, fos expression was assessed in the superficial DH, including in nociceptive neurons, identified by neurokinin 1 (NK1) immunoreactivity, and interneurons. Inhibitory terminal density onto NK1+ neurons was assessed and lastly, a cohort of animals was treated for 3 days with gabapentin. Results At 4 weeks post-CFA, walking reduced weight distribution to the affected joint and increased DH fos expression, including in NK1+ neurons. Neuronal activity in inhibitory cells and inhibitory terminal density on NK1+ neurons were decreased in CFA-treated animals compared with controls. Treatment with gabapentin led to recovered behaviour and DH neuronal activity pattern in CFA-treated animals. Conclusion We describe an assay to assess movement-induced pain-related behaviour changes in a rodent IA model. Furthermore, our results suggest that disinhibition may contribute to pain related to movement in IA.
2 citations
TL;DR: Current clinical research on neuropathic pain in Germany focusses on the validation of human models, patient phenotyping, mechanism-based classification and treatment as well as on molecular pathomechanisms.
Abstract: This article, without presuming to be comprehensive, gives a brief outline of the development of research on neuropathic pain in Germany. Current clinical research on this subject focusses on the validation of human models, patient phenotyping, mechanism-based classification and treatment as well as on molecular pathomechanisms. This clinical research is based to a large extent on the work of several internationally recognized basic researchers in the 1990s. In particular, findings from system physiology led to the analysis of clinical phenotypes and the underlying pathophysiology. In parallel, basic research achieved international top levels through the development of innovative methods. Close cooperation, building of consortia and European networking made major contributions to the success of this research.
2 citations
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