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pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January , 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies.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 Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater eff ects than did unpublished studies (r² 9·3%, p=0·009).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: Emerging nondrug medical therapy with promising results in neuropathic pain also encompasses noninvasive brain neurostimulation techniques, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranIAL direct electrical stimulation.
Abstract: Neuropathic pain represents a highly unmet medical need because most of the available treatments have a modest efficacy or dose-limiting side effects. Hence, novel therapeutic perspectives are warranted. Many compounds acting on new pain targets are in preclinical or early clinical development. Only few clinical trials have suggested their clinical relevance in neuropathic pain. This concerns in particular NaV1.7 antagonists and angiotensin type II inhibitors. Another type of emerging drug therapy in neuropathic pain is represented by drugs largely used for other indications, such as botulinum toxin A and the antiepileptic oxcarbazepine, which have recently found to be effective in peripheral neuropathic pain. Emerging nondrug medical therapy with promising results in neuropathic pain also encompasses noninvasive brain neurostimulation techniques, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct electrical stimulation. In this article, we review emerging medical treatments for neuropathic pain that are clinically available or with promising results from clinical trials.
32 citations
Cites background or result from "Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pai..."
...Most of the treatments usually available have a modest efficacy or safety.(6,16) Therefore, new therapeutic prospects are welcome....
[...]
...Unfortunately, meta-analyses indicate that only a minority of patients with neuropathic pain have adequate response to drug therapy and that many of these drugs have dose-limiting side effects.(6,16) Other drugs expected to be effective such as oromucosal cannabinoids, the opioid agonist, and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor tapentadol and several antiepileptics (lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, and topiramate) have yielded discrepant results, although some of them may be effective in subgroups of patients (see below)....
[...]
...and despite evidence for clinical efficacy in neuropathic pain, strong opioids are now recommended as the last choice in case of insufficient response and/or side effects to first-line or secondline medications with careful monitoring.(16)...
[...]
...These data have led to recommend BTX-A as a third choice in the therapeutic arsenal of peripheral neuropathic pain for refractory patients.(16) Table 1...
[...]
TL;DR: It is found that the pharmacogenetic analysis of CYP2D6 could be helpful in foreseeing the safety and effectiveness of codeine or oxycodone treatment in CLBP, and reduced CYP 2D6 activity is correlated with lack of therapeutic effect.
Abstract: Background Opioids are widely used for chronic low back pain (CLBP); however, it is still unclear how to predict their effectiveness and safety. Codeine, tramadol and oxycodone are metabolized by CYP/CYP450 2D6 (CYP2D6), a highly polymorphic enzyme linked to allele-specific related differences in metabolic activity. Purpose CYP2D6 genetic polymorphisms could potentially help to predict the effectiveness and safety of opioid-based drugs in clinical practice, especially in the treatment of CLBP. Patients and methods A cohort of 224 Italian patients with CLBP treated with codeine or oxycodone was retrospectively evaluated to determine whether adverse reactions and effectiveness were related to CYP2D6 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. CYP2D6 genotyping was performed using the xTAG® CYP2D6 Kit v3 (Luminex) to determine CYP2D6 metabolizer phenotype (poor, intermediate, rapid and ultrarapid). Subjects from the cohort were categorized into two groups according to the occurrence of side effects (Case) or benefit (Control) after chronic analgesic treatment. The impact of CYP2D6 polymorphism on treatment outcome was tested at the metabolizer phenotype, diplotype and haplotype levels. Results CYP2D6 polymorphism was significantly associated with opioid treatment outcome (Omnibus P=0.018, for both global haplotype and diplotype distribution test). CYP2D6*6 and *9 carriers, alleles characterized by a reduced (*9) or absent (*6) enzymatic activity, were significantly (P<0.05) associated with therapeutic failure. CYP2D6 ultrarapid metabolizers (CYP2D6*2N patients) showed an increased risk of side effects, as would be predicted. Despite their low frequency, CYP2D6 *1/*11, *4/*6 and *41/* 2N diplotypes showed significant (P<0.05) associations of efficacy and side effects with chronic opioid treatment. Conclusion Our results showed that reduced CYP2D6 activity is correlated with lack of therapeutic effect. We found that the pharmacogenetic analysis of CYP2D6 could be helpful in foreseeing the safety and effectiveness of codeine or oxycodone treatment in CLBP.
32 citations
Cites background from "Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pai..."
...Hence, genomics could be helpful in stratifying subgroups of patients in whom treatments are potentially more effective, improving the therapeutic index of drugs in pain therapy.(70) Nowadays precision medicine is a great opportunity with a revolutionary impact on the “health system”, especially in terms of effectiveness, safety, ethics and cost savings....
[...]
TL;DR: Findings suggest that DALDA may represent a potential alternative to current opioid therapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain and is likely to be associated with minimal adverse effects.
Abstract: Background:Opioids have long been regarded as the most effective drugs for the treatment of severe acute and chronic pain. Unfortunately, their therapeutic efficacy and clinical utility have been limited because of central and peripheral side effects.Methods:To determine the therapeutic value of per
32 citations
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that neither acute nor long-term antiallodynic effect of pregabalin in a context of neuropathic pain is mediated by the endogenous opioid system, which differs from opioid treatment of pain and antidepressant treatment of neuropathy pain.
Abstract: BackgroundClinical management of neuropathic pain, which is pain arising as a consequence of a lesion or a disease affecting the somatosensory system, partly relies on the use of anticonvulsant dru...
32 citations
Cites background from "Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pai..."
...The recommended pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain includes the use of anticonvulsant drugs, such as the gabapentinoids, pregabalin, and gabapentin.(3) (1)Institut des Neurosciences Cellulaires et Intégratives, Centre National de la...
[...]
...Gabapentinoid anticonvulsants, which target the VDCCs a2d-1 subunit, have proved to be effective in a number of neuropathic pain conditions.(3,39) Similarly to many reports in various animal models,(6,20,40,41) we showed that pregabalin has a shortterm transitory antiallodynic action after an acute administration; however, this effect cannot be considered as representative of the main clinical therapeutic effect since the mechanical allodynia reappears within 2 h following the injection....
[...]
TL;DR: Imipramine treatment compared with placebo significantly improved overall health in patients with multiple functional somatic syndromes when both treatments were supported by regular contacts with clinicians.
31 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