Efficacy and safety of milnacipran 100 mg/day in patients with fibromyalgia: Results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Assessing Ethnic Minority Representation in Fibromyalgia Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Recruitment Demographics

The under-representation of non-White participants in Western countries in clinical research has received increased attention, due to recognized physiological differences between ethnic groups, which may affect the efficacy and optimal dosage of some treatments. This review assessed ethnic diversity in pharmaceutical trials for fibromyalgia, a poorly understood chronic pain disorder. We also investigated longitudinal change to non-White participant proportions in trials and non-White participants' likelihood to discontinue with fibromyalgia research between trial stages (retention). First, we identified relevant trials conducted in the United States and Canada between 2000 and 2022, by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases. In trials conducted both across the United States and Canada, and exclusively within the United States, approximately 90% of participants were White. A longitudinal analysis also found no change in the proportion of non-White participants in trials conducted across the United States and Canada between 2000 and 2022. Finally, we found no significant differences in trial retention between White and non-White participants. This review highlights the low numbers of ethnic minorities in fibromyalgia trials conducted in the United States and Canada, with no change to these proportions over the past 22 years. Furthermore, non-White participants were not more likely to discontinue with the fibromyalgia research once they were recruited.

Efficacy and Safety of Sublingual Cyclobenzaprine for the Treatment of Fibromyalgia: Results From a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TNX-102 SL, a once-nightly sublingual formulation of cyclobenzaprine, in reducing pain in patients with fibromyalgia (FM).

METHODS

RELIEF was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Overall, 503 patients received TNX-102 SL 2.8 mg for 2 weeks, followed by 5.6 mg for 12 weeks (248 patients), or matching placebo (255 patients). The primary end point was change from baseline at week 14 in the weekly average of daily pain scores. Secondary end points included Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scores, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Revised (FIQR) scores, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance and Fatigue scores, and daily sleep quality. Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting.

RESULTS

Reduction in daily pain from baseline at week 14 was significantly greater with TNX-102 SL (least squares [LS] mean change -1.9 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -2.1, -1.7]) versus placebo (LS mean change -1.5 [95% CI -1.7, -1.3]; P = 0.01). TNX-102 SL was not associated with significant improvement in PGIC at week 14 but was associated with improvements in FIQR scores, PROMIS scores, and daily sleep quality. Overall, 59.7% of patients receiving TNX-102 SL and 46.3% receiving placebo reported treatment-emergent AEs; the most common were oral hypoesthesia (17.3% with TNX-102 SL versus 0.4% with placebo), oral paresthesia (5.6% versus 0.4%, respectively), and product taste abnormal (4.4% versus 0.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this phase III, randomized, controlled trial of patients with FM, treatment with TNX-102 SL was associated with significant reductions in daily pain and was safe and well tolerated.

Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common in adults, and often has a detrimental impact upon physical ability, well-being, and quality of life. Previous reviews have shown that certain antidepressants may be effective in reducing pain with some benefit in improving patients' global impression of change for certain chronic pain conditions. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis (NMA) examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of antidepressants for adults with chronic pain (except headache).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases, and clinical trials registries, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions in January 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that examined antidepressants for chronic pain against any comparator. If the comparator was placebo, another medication, another antidepressant, or the same antidepressant at different doses, then we required the study to be double-blind. We included RCTs with active comparators that were unable to be double-blinded (e.g. psychotherapy) but rated them as high risk of bias. We excluded RCTs where the follow-up was less than two weeks and those with fewer than 10 participants in each arm.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors separately screened, data extracted, and judged risk of bias. We synthesised the data using Bayesian NMA and pairwise meta-analyses for each outcome and ranked the antidepressants in terms of their effectiveness using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We primarily used Confidence in Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) and Risk of Bias due to Missing Evidence in Network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN) to assess the certainty of the evidence. Where it was not possible to use CINeMA and ROB-MEN due to the complexity of the networks, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcomes were substantial (50%) pain relief, pain intensity, mood, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), serious adverse events, and withdrawal.

MAIN RESULTS

This review and NMA included 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. The majority of studies were placebo-controlled (83), and parallel-armed (141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies); neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of RCTs was 10 weeks. Seven studies provided no useable data and were omitted from the NMA. The majority of studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. In duloxetine studies, standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that of duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain.  Primary efficacy outcomes Duloxetine standard dose (60 mg) showed a small to moderate effect for substantial pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69 to 2.17; 16 studies, 4490 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and continuous pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.24; 18 studies, 4959 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For pain intensity, milnacipran standard dose (100 mg) also showed a small effect (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.06; 4 studies, 1866 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mirtazapine (30 mg) had a moderate effect on mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.22; 1 study, 406 participants; low-certainty evidence), while duloxetine showed a small effect (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.1; 26 studies, 7952 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however it is important to note that most studies excluded participants with mental health conditions, and so average anxiety and depression scores tended to be in the 'normal' or 'subclinical' ranges at baseline already. Secondary efficacy outcomes Across all secondary efficacy outcomes (moderate pain relief, physical function, sleep, quality of life, and PGIC), duloxetine and milnacipran were the highest-ranked antidepressants with moderate-certainty evidence, although effects were small. For both duloxetine and milnacipran, standard doses were as efficacious as high doses. Safety There was very low-certainty evidence for all safety outcomes (adverse events, serious adverse events, and withdrawal) across all antidepressants. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from the NMAs for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review and NMAs show that despite studies investigating 25 different antidepressants, the only antidepressant we are certain about for the treatment of chronic pain is duloxetine. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Evidence for all other antidepressants was low certainty. As RCTs excluded people with low mood, we were unable to establish the effects of antidepressants for people with chronic pain and depression. There is currently no reliable evidence for the long-term efficacy of any antidepressant, and no reliable evidence for the safety of antidepressants for chronic pain at any time point.

Comparison of Amitriptyline and US Food and Drug Administration-Approved Treatments for Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Importance

Amitriptyline is an established medication used off-label for the treatment of fibromyalgia, but pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran are the only pharmacological agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat fibromyalgia.

Objective

To investigate the comparative effectiveness and acceptability associated with pharmacological treatment options for fibromyalgia.

Data Sources

Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were conducted on November 20, 2018, and updated on July 29, 2020.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing amitriptyline or any FDA-approved doses of investigated drugs.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Four independent reviewers extracted data using a standardized data extraction sheet and assessed quality of RCTs. A random-effects bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to January 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Comparative effectiveness and acceptability (defined as discontinuation of treatment owing to adverse drug reactions) associated with amitriptyline (off-label), pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran (on-label) in reducing fibromyalgia symptoms. The following doses were compared: 60-mg and 120-mg duloxetine; 150-mg, 300-mg, 450-mg, and 600-mg pregabalin; 100-mg and 200-mg milnacipran; and amitriptyline. Effect sizes are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Findings were considered statistically significant when the 95% CrI did not include the null value (0 for SMD and 1 for OR). Relative treatment ranking using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was also evaluated.

Results

A total of 36 studies (11 930 patients) were included. The mean (SD) age of patients was 48.4 (10.4) years, and 11 261 patients (94.4%) were women. Compared with placebo, amitriptyline was associated with reduced sleep disturbances (SMD, -0.97; 95% CrI, -1.10 to -0.83), fatigue (SMD, -0.64; 95% CrI, -0.75 to -0.53), and improved quality of life (SMD, -0.80; 95% CrI, -0.94 to -0.65). Duloxetine 120 mg was associated with the highest improvement in pain (SMD, -0.33; 95% CrI, -0.36 to -0.30) and depression (SMD, -0.25; 95% CrI, -0.32 to -0.17) vs placebo. All treatments were associated with inferior acceptability (higher dropout rate) than placebo, except amitriptyline (OR, 0.78; 95% CrI, 0.31 to 1.66). According to the SUCRA-based relative ranking of treatments, duloxetine 120 mg was associated with higher efficacy for treating pain and depression, while amitriptyline was associated with higher efficacy for improving sleep, fatigue, and overall quality of life.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that clinicians should consider how treatments could be tailored to individual symptoms, weighing the benefits and acceptability, when prescribing medications to patients with fibromyalgia.

Milnacipran for the Treatment of Fibromyalgia

Purpose of review

This is a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the use of milnacipran in treating fibromyalgia. A chronic pain disorder with other system disturbances, fibromyalgia is often resistant to many therapeutic approaches. This review presents the background, evidence, and indications for using milnacipran as a treatment option for this condition.

Recent Findings

The definition of fibromyalgia has evolved over many years as it is a relatively tricky syndrome to measure objectively. Today, it is characterized by chronic, widespread pain accompanied by alterations in sleep, mood, and other behavioral aspects. A variety of therapeutic regimens currently used to treat the syndrome as a singular approach are rarely effective.Milnacipran is one of three drugs currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of fibromyalgia. It acts as a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, which results in decreased pain transmission. Milnacipran remains an effective treatment option for fibromyalgia in adults and needs to be further evaluated with existing therapeutic approaches.

Summary

Fibromyalgia is a broad-spectrum disorder primarily characterized by chronic pain coupled with disturbances in cognitive functioning and sleep. The progression of this syndrome is often debilitating and significantly affects the quality of life. Milnacipran is one of three FDA-approved drugs used to alleviate the symptom burden and is comparatively more therapeutic in specific domains of fibromyalgia. A more holistic approach is needed to treat fibromyalgia effectively and further research, including direct comparison studies, should be conducted to fully evaluate the usefulness of this drug.

Effects of Wearable Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterized by widespread pain and interference with daily activities. The aim of this study is to assess the benefit of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for persons diagnosed with fibromyalgia.

Patients and Methods

Adults meeting diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized in a double-blind trial to receive either an active (n=62) or sham (n=57) wearable TENS device for 3-months. Subjects were classified as having lower or higher pain sensitivity by Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST). Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC, primary outcome) and secondary efficacy measures including Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) were assessed at baseline, 6-weeks and 3-months. Treatment effects were determined by a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N=119). A pre-specified subgroup analysis of pain sensitivity was conducted using an interaction term in the model.

Results

No differences were found between active and sham treatment on PGIC scores at 3-months (0.34, 95% CI [−0.37, 1.04], p=0.351) in the ITT population. However, in subjects with higher pain sensitivity (n=60), PGIC was significantly greater for active treatment compared to sham (1.19, 95% CI [0.24, 2.13], p=0.014). FIQR total score (−7.47, 95% CI [−12.46, −2.48], p=0.003), FIQR pain item (−0.62, 95% CI [−1.17, −0.06], p=0.029), BPI Interference (−0.70, 95% CI [−1.30, −0.11], p=0.021) and PDQ (−1.69, 95% CI [−3.20, −0.18], p=0.028) exhibited significant improvements for active treatment compared to sham in the ITT population. Analgesics use was stable and comparable in both groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated modest treatment effects of reduced disease impact, pain and functional impairment from wearable TENS in individuals with fibromyalgia. Subjects with higher pain sensitivity exhibited larger treatment effects than those with lower pain sensitivity. Wearable TENS may be a safe treatment option for people with fibromyalgia.

Clinicaltrials.gov Registration

NCT03714425.

III. Detecting Treatment Effects in Clinical Trials With Different Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessment

Pain intensity represents the primary outcome in most pain clinical trials. Identifying methods to measure aspects of pain that are most sensitive to treatment may facilitate discovery of effective interventions. In this third of 3 articles examining alternative indices of pain intensity derived from ecological momentary assessments (EMA), we compare treatment effects based on Average Pain, Maximum Pain, Minimum Pain, Pain Variability, Time in High Pain, Time in Low Pain, and Pain After Wake-Up. We also examine which indices contribute to Patient Global Impressions of Change (PGIC). Data came from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of milnacipran for fibromyalgia treatment; 2,084 patients provided >1 million EMA pain intensity ratings over 24 (Study 1) or 26 (Study 2) treatment weeks. Pain Variability and Time in High Pain produced significantly smaller treatment effects than Average Pain; other pain indices showed effects that were numerically smaller, but not significantly different from Average Pain. Changes in all pain indices were significantly associated with PGIC, with improvements in Maximum Pain and in Pain Variability offering small incremental contributions to understanding PGIC over Average Pain. Results suggest that different pain indices could be used to detect treatment effects in pain clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Alternative summary measures of pain intensity derived from EMA may broaden the scope of outcomes useful in pain clinical trials. In this analysis of a pharmacological treatment for fibromyalgia, most pain summary measures indicated similar effects; improvements in Maximum Pain and Pain Variability contributed to understanding PGIC over Average Pain.

An Association of Serotonin with Pain Disorders and Its Modulation by Estrogens

Ovarian hormones play an important role in pain perception, and are responsible, at least in part, for the pain threshold differences between the sexes. Modulation of pain and its perception are mediated by neurochemical changes in several pathways, affecting both the central and peripheral nervous systems. One of the most studied neurotransmitters related to pain disorders is serotonin. Estrogen can modify serotonin synthesis and metabolism, promoting a general increase in its tonic effects. Studies evaluating the relationship between serotonin and disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, migraine, and other types of headache suggest a clear impact of this neurotransmitter, thereby increasing the interest in serotonin as a possible future therapeutic target. This literature review describes the importance of substances such as serotonin and ovarian hormones in pain perception and illustrates the relationship between those two, and their direct influence on the presentation of the aforementioned pain-related conditions. Additionally, we review the pathways and receptors implicated in each disorder. Finally, the objective was to stimulate future pharmacological research to experimentally evaluate the potential of serotonin modulators and ovarian hormones as therapeutic agents to regulate pain in specific subpopulations.

Milnacipran poorly modulates pain in patients suffering from fibromyalgia: a randomized double-blind controlled study

Introduction

Fibromyalgia is characterized by widespread and chronic pain, and its prevalence is increasing worldwide. Milnacipran, an antidepressant, is often prescribed for fibromyalgia with a possible beneficial effect on central pain modulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate if milnacipran could modify the status of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) in patients suffering from fibromyalgia.

Design and setting

Randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

Subjects and methods

Women with fibromyalgia received milnacipran 100 mg or placebo. The primary end point was the evolution of CPM with treatments after a 30-second painful stimulus. Secondary outcomes included the predictability of milnacipran efficacy from CPM performance, evolution of global pain, mechanical sensitivity, thermal pain threshold, mechanical allodynia, cognitive function, and tolerance.

Results

Fifty-four women with fibromyalgia (46.7±10.6 years) were included and randomized, and 24 patients were analyzed in each group. At inclusion, CPM was dysfunctional (CPM₃₀=-0.5±1.9), and global pain was 6.5±1.8. After treatment, there was a nonsignificant CPM difference between milnacipran and placebo (CPM₃₀=-0.46±1.22 vs -0.69±1.43, respectively, p=0.55) and 18.8% vs 6.3% (p=0.085) patients did reactivate CPM after milnacipran vs placebo. Initial CPM was not a predictor of milnacipran efficacy. Global pain, mechanical and thermal thresholds, allodynia, cognition, and tolerance were not significantly different between both groups.

Conclusion

Milnacipran did not display a significant analgesic effect after 1-month treatment, but the tendency of milnacipran to reactivate CPM in a number of patients must be explored with longer treatment duration in future studies and pleads for possible subtypes of fibromyalgia patients.

Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.

Longitudinal stability of fibromyalgia symptom clusters

Background

Using self-report questionnaires of key fibromyalgia symptom domains (pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, function, stiffness, dyscognition, depression, and anxiety), we previously identified four unique symptom clusters. The purpose of this study was to examine the stability of fibromyalgia symptom clusters between baseline and 2-year follow-up.

Methods

Women with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia completed the Brief Pain Inventory, Profile of Mood States, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep measure, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, Multiple Ability Self-Report Questionnaire, Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, and the 36-Item Short Form Survey Instrument at baseline. Follow-up measures were completed approximately 2 years later. The hierarchical agglomerative clustering algorithm previously developed was applied; agreement between baseline and follow-up was assessed with the κ statistic.

Results

Among 433 participants, the mean age was 56 (range 20–85) years. The median Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire total score was 57 (range 8–96). More than half of participants (58%) remained in the same cluster at follow-up as at baseline, which represented moderate agreement between baseline and follow-up (κ = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37–0.50). Only two patients changed from high symptom intensity to low symptom intensity; similarly, only three moved from low to high.

Conclusions

Fibromyalgia patients classified into four unique symptom clusters based on the key domains of pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, function, stiffness, dyscognition, depression, and anxiety showed moderate stability in cluster assignment after 2 years. Few patients moved between the two extremes of severity, and it was slightly more common to move to a lower symptom level than to worsen.

Trial registration

Not applicable.

Alternatives to Opioids in the Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Randomized, Controlled, and Blinded Clinical Trials

Chronic pain exerts a tremendous burden on individuals and societies. If one views chronic pain as a single disease entity, then it is the most common and costly medical condition. At present, medical professionals who treat patients in chronic pain are recommended to provide comprehensive and multidisciplinary treatments, which may include pharmacotherapy. Many providers use nonopioid medications to treat chronic pain; however, for some patients, opioid analgesics are the exclusive treatment of chronic pain. However, there is currently an epidemic of opioid use in the United States, and recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have recommended that the use of opioids for nonmalignant chronic pain be used only in certain circumstances. The goal of this review was to report the current body of evidence-based medicine gained from prospective, randomized-controlled, blinded studies on the use of nonopioid analgesics for the most common noncancer chronic pain conditions. A total of 9566 studies were obtained during literature searches, and 271 of these met inclusion for this review. Overall, while many nonopioid analgesics have been found to be effective in reducing pain for many chronic pain conditions, it is evident that the number of high-quality studies is lacking, and the effect sizes noted in many studies are not considered to be clinically significant despite statistical significance. More research is needed to determine effective and mechanism-based treatments for the chronic pain syndromes discussed in this review. Utilization of rigorous and homogeneous research methodology would likely allow for better consistency and reproducibility, which is of utmost importance in guiding evidence-based care.

Multidimensional daily diary of fatigue-fibromyalgia-17 items (MDF-fibro-17): part 2 psychometric evaluation in fibromyalgia patients

Background

The Multidimensional Daily Diary of Fatigue-Fibromyalgia-17 instrument (MDF-Fibro-17) has been developed for use in fibromyalgia (FM) clinical studies and includes 5 domains: Global Fatigue Experience, Cognitive Fatigue, Physical Fatigue, Motivation, and Impact on Function. Psychometric properties of the MDF-Fibro-17 needed to demonstrate the appropriateness of using this instrument in clinical studies are presented.

Methods

Psychometric analyses were conducted to evaluate the factor structure, reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the MDF-Fibro-17 using data from a Phase 2 clinical study of FM patients (N = 381). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed to ensure understanding of the multidimensional domain structure, and a secondary factor analysis of the domains examined the appropriateness of calculating a total score in addition to domain scores. Longitudinal psychometric analyses (test-retest reliability and responder analysis) were also conducted on the data from Baseline to Week 6.

Results

The CFA supported the 17-item, 5 domain structure of this instrument as the best fit of the data: comparative fit index (CFI) and non-normed fit index (NNFI) were 0.997 and 0.992 respectively, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) was 0.010 and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.06. In addition, total score (CFI and NNFI both 0.95) met required standards. For the total and 5 domain scores, reliability and validity data were acceptable: test-retest and internal consistency were above 0.9; correlations were as expected with the Global Fatigue Index (GFI) (0.62-0.75), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total (0.59–0.71), and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality (VT) (0.43–0.53); and discrimination was shown using quintile scores for the GFI, FIQ Total, and Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) quartiles. In addition, sensitivity to change was demonstrated with an overall mean responder score of -2.59 using anchor-based methods.

Conclusion

The MDF-Fibro-17 reliably measures 5 domains of FM-related fatigue and psychometric evaluation confirms that this measure meets or exceeds each of the predefined acceptable thresholds for evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to changes in clinical status. This suggests that the MDF-Fibro-17 is an appropriate and responsive measure of FM-related fatigue in clinical studies.

A Brief Review of the Pharmacology of Amitriptyline and Clinical Outcomes in Treating Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia is a complex chronic condition characterized by pain, physical fatigue, sleep disorder and cognitive impairment. Evidence-based guidelines recommend antidepressants as treatments of fibromyalgia where tricyclics are often considered to have the greatest efficacy, with amitriptyline often being a first-line treatment. Amitriptyline evokes a preferential reduction in pain and fatigue of fibromyalgia, and in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) score, which is a quality of life assessment. The multimodal profile of the mechanisms of action of amitriptyline include monoamine reuptake inhibition, receptor modulation and ion channel modulation. Several of the actions of amitriptyline on multiple nociceptive and sensory processes at central and peripheral locations have the potential to act cumulatively to suppress the characteristic symptoms of fibromyalgia. Greater understanding of the role of these mechanisms of action of amitriptyline could provide further clues to the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia and to a preferable pharmacological profile for future drug development.

Update on Treatment Guideline in Fibromyalgia Syndrome with Focus on Pharmacology

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a chronic condition with unknown aetiology. The pathophysiology of the disease is incompletely understood; despite advances in our knowledge with regards to abnormal central and peripheral pain processing, and hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal dysfunction, there is no clear specific pathophysiological therapeutic target. The management of this complex condition has thus perplexed the medical community for many years, and several national and international guidelines have aimed to address this complexity. The most recent guidelines from European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2016), Canadian Pain Society (2012), and The Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) (2012) highlight the change in attitudes regarding the overall approach to FMS, but offer varying advice with regards to the use of pharmacological agents. Amitriptyline, Pregabalin and Duloxetine are used most commonly in FMS and though modestly effective, are useful adjunctive treatment to non-pharmaceutical measures.

Clinical Experience With Desvenlafaxine in Treatment of Patients With Fibromyalgia Syndrome

Two multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive-design trials of desvenlafaxine for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) were conducted. In study 1, male and female patients were randomized to a 27-week treatment with placebo or desvenlafaxine 50, 100, 200, or 400 mg/d. In study 2, female patients were randomized to an 8-week treatment with placebo, desvenlafaxine 200 mg/d, or pregabalin 450 mg/d after a placebo run-in. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score. Protocol-specified interim analyses were planned after 12 (study 1) and 8 (study 2) weeks of treatment. Safety data were collected. In all, 697 patients were randomly assigned to treatment in study 1. At the interim analysis (n = 346), none of the desvenlafaxine doses met the efficacy criteria (mean [SE] advantage over placebo, -0.21 [0.36] to 0.04 [0.35]), and the study was terminated. Study 2 was stopped for business reasons before the planned interim analysis. NRS scores in week 8 were -1.98 (0.37), -1.60 (0.37), and -1.70 (0.38) for placebo (n = 26), desvenlafaxine 250 mg/d (n = 24), and pregabalin 450 mg/d (n = 21), respectively; neither active treatment differed significantly from placebo. Desvenlafaxine was generally safe and well tolerated. Efficacy of desvenlafaxine for pain associated with FMS was not demonstrated.

Is the Efficacy of Milnacipran in Fibromyalgia Predictable? A Data-Mining Analysis of Baseline and Outcome Variables

OBJECTIVES

Minalcipran has been approved for the treatment of fibromyalgia in several countries including Australia. Australian agency considered that the overall efficacy is moderate, although clinically significant, and could be translated into a real and strong improvement in some patients. The determination of the characteristics of patients who could benefit the most from milnacipran (MLN) is the primary objective of this manuscript.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the 3 pivotal phase 3 clinical trials of the Australian submission dossier were assembled into a database. A clustering method was implemented to exhibit natural groupings of homogeneous observations into clusters of efficacy outcomes and individual patients. Next, baseline characteristics were investigated using a data-mining method to determine the clinical features that may be predictive of a substantially improved effect of MLN on a set of efficacy outcomes.

RESULTS

The clustering analysis reveals 3 symptom domains: "Pain and global," "Mood and central status," and "Function." We show that improvement in "Fatigue" goes with improvement in "Function." Furthermore, the predictive data-mining analysis exhibits 4 single baseline characteristics that are associated with a substantially improved effect of MLN on efficacy outcomes. These are high pain intensity, low anxiety or catastrophizing level, absence of major sleeping problems, and physical limitations in the daily life effort.

DISCUSSION

Clustering and predictive data-mining methods provide additional insight about fibromyalgia, its symptoms, and treatment. The information is useful to physicians to optimize prescriptions in the daily practice and to regulatory bodies to refine indications.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Pain

Adolescents and children are frequently affected by chronic pain conditions that can lead to disability and distress. The best approach to evaluation and treatment of these conditions involves use of the biopsychosocial model, which includes use of medication management. Chronic pain conditions are treated pharmacologically with a number of different medication classes via several routes of administration as drug delivery systems have progressed. These include anti-inflammatory drugs, muscle relaxants, antiepileptic medicines, antidepressants, opioids, and local anesthetics. Most are prescribed without regulatory body approval to treat specific pain syndromes as data to support their use are sparse. Medical decision making is guided by experience, empiric evidence, extrapolation from adult studies, and matching medication classes with the theorized mechanism of the pain condition. It is not recommended that nonpain practitioners prescribe opioid medications for treatment of chronic pain conditions, and pain management practitioners should seek to minimize their use. The appropriate and commonly used medications for pain conditions are presented in this narrative review.

Effect of Milnacipran on Pain in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis with Widespread Pain: A Randomized Blinded Crossover Trial

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials have shown that serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, such as milnacipran, decrease pain in noninflammatory pain conditions such as fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis. We examined the effect of milnacipran on self-reported pain intensity and experimental pain sensitivity among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with widespread pain and stable RA disease activity.

METHODS

In this double-blind, crossover study, patients with RA with widespread pain, receiving a stable treatment regimen, were randomized (by a random number generator) to receive milnacipran 50 mg twice daily or placebo for 6 weeks, followed by a 3-week washout and crossed over to the other arm for the remaining 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change in average pain intensity, assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory short form. The sample size was calculated to detect a 30% improvement in pain with power = 0.80 and α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 43 randomized subjects, 41 received the study drug, and 32 completed the 15-week study per protocol. On a 0-10 scale, average pain intensity decreased by 0.39 (95% CI -1.27 to 0.49, p = 0.37) more points during 6 weeks of milnacipran treatment compared with placebo. In the subgroup of subjects with swollen joint count ≤ 1, average pain intensity decreased by 1.14 more points during 6 weeks of milnacipran compared with placebo (95% CI -2.26 to -0.01, p = 0.04). Common adverse events included nausea (26.8%) and loss of appetite (9.7%).

CONCLUSION

Compared with placebo, milnacipran did not improve overall, self-reported pain intensity among subjects with widespread pain receiving stable RA medications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01207453.

Milnacipran for pain in fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2012. That review considered both fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain, but the efficacy of milnacipran for neuropathic pain is now dealt with in a separate review.Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine (noradrenaline) reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) that is licensed for the treatment of fibromyalgia in some countries, including Canada, Russia, and the United States.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of milnacipran for pain in fibromyalgia in adults and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE to 18 May 2015, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, and two clinical trial registries. For the earlier review, we also contacted the manufacturer.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies of eight weeks' duration or longer, comparing milnacipran with placebo or another active treatment in fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and two review authors examined issues of study quality independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new study with 100 participants for the pooled analysis. We identified two additional reports of a study using an enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal (EERW) design that included participants from earlier randomised controlled trials and an open-label study. Because this study used the same participants already included in our main analysis, and a different design, we dealt with it separately.The main analysis included six studies (five from the earlier review; 4238 participants in total), all of which were placebo-controlled, and used titration to a target dose of milnacipran 100 or 200 mg, with assessment after 8 to 24 weeks of stable treatment. There were no studies with active comparators. Study quality was generally good, although the imputation method used in analyses of the primary outcomes could overestimate treatment effect.Both doses of milnacipran provided moderate levels of pain relief (at least 30% pain intensity reduction) to about 40% of participants treated, compared to 30% with placebo, giving a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) of 6 to 10 (high quality evidence). Using a stricter definition for responder and a more conservative method of analysis gave lower levels of response (while maintaining a 10% difference between milnacipran and placebo) and increased the NNT to 11 (high quality evidence). One EERW study was broadly supportive.Adverse events were common in both milnacipran (86%) and placebo (78%) groups (high quality evidence), but serious adverse events did not differ between groups (less than 2%) (low quality evidence). Nausea, constipation, and headache were the most common events showing the greatest difference between groups (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNH) of 5.7 for nausea, 13 for constipation, and 29 for headache) (moderate quality evidence).Withdrawals for any reason were more common with milnacipran than placebo, and more common with 200 mg (NNH 9) than 100 mg (NNH 23), compared with placebo. This was largely driven by adverse event withdrawals, where the NNH compared with placebo was 14 for 100 mg and 7.0 for 200 mg (high quality evidence). Withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were less common with milnacipran than placebo but did not differ between doses (number needed to treat to prevent an additional unwanted outcome (NNTp) of 41) (moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available indicates that milnacipran 100 mg or 200 mg is effective for a minority in the treatment of pain due to fibromyalgia, providing moderate levels of pain relief (at least 30%) to about 40% of participants, compared with about 30% with placebo. There were insufficient data to assess substantial levels of pain relief (at least 50%), and the use of last observation carried forward imputation may overestimate drug efficacy. Using stricter criteria for 'responder' and a more conservative method of analysis gave lower response rates (about 26% with milnacipran versus 17% with placebo). Milnacipran was associated with increased adverse events and adverse event withdrawals, which were significantly greater for the higher dose.

An update on pharmacotherapy for the treatment of fibromyalgia

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia is a syndrome characterized by chronic generalized pain in addition to different symptoms such as fatigue, sleep disturbances, stiffness, cognitive impairment, and psychological distress. Multidisciplinary treatment combining pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies is advised.

AREAS COVERED

Publications describing randomized controlled trials and long-term extension studies evaluating drug treatment for fibromyalgia were searched in PubMed and Scopus and included in this review.

EXPERT OPINION

Different drugs are recommended for the treatment of fibromyalgia by different published guidelines, although only three of them have been approved for this indication by the US FDA, and none have been approved by the European Medicines Agency. According to the available evidence, pregabalin, duloxetine and milnacipran should be the drugs of choice for the treatment of this disease, followed by amitriptyline and cyclobenzaprine. Other drugs with at least one positive clinical trial include some selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, moclobemide, pirlindole, gabapentin, tramadol, tropisetron, sodium oxybate and nabilone. None of the currently available drugs are fully effective against the whole spectrum of fibromyalgia symptoms, namely pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances and depression, among the most relevant symptoms. Combination therapy is an option that needs to be more thoroughly investigated in clinical trials.

Preliminary experience using milnacipran in patients with juvenile fibromyalgia: lessons from a clinical trial program

BACKGROUND

There are no approved medications for juvenile fibromyalgia (JFM), a disorder that is often under-diagnosed. The effects of milnacipran, a drug approved for the management of fibromyalgia (FM) in adults, was assessed in a clinical trial program for JFM.

METHODS

Patients, ages 13-17 years who met the Yunus and Masi criteria for JFM and/or 1990 American College of Rheumatology criteria for FM, were enrolled in a responder-enriched, randomized withdrawal trial. After receiving open-label milnacipran (8 weeks), patients with ≥50 % improvement in pain underwent double-blind randomization (1:2) to either placebo or continuing treatment with milnacipran (8 weeks). All patients, including those who did not meet the randomization criteria for double-blind withdrawal, were allowed to enter an extension study with open-label milnacipran (up to 52 weeks). The primary endpoint was loss of therapeutic response (LTR) during the double-blind period. Additional outcome measures included the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS), Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL: Generic Core Scales, Multidimensional Fatigue Scale), and Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC). Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, electrocardiograms, and laboratory tests.

RESULTS

The milnacipran program was terminated early due to low enrollment. Because only 20 patients were randomized into the double-blind withdrawal period, statistical analyses were not conducted for the LTR endpoint. However, 116 patients entered the open-label period of the initial study and 57 participated in the open-label extension study. Their experience provides preliminary information about the use of milnacipran in JFM patients. During both open-label periods, there were mean improvements in pain severity, PGIC, PedsQL, and MASC scores. No unexpected safety issues were detected. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent AEs were nausea, headache, vomiting, and dizziness. Mean increases in heart rate and blood pressure were observed, and were consistent with the AE profile in adults with FM.

CONCLUSIONS

The open-label findings provide preliminary evidence that milnacipran may improve symptoms of JFM, with a safety and tolerability profile that is consistent with the experience in adult FM patients. Future trial designs for JFM should consider the relatively low recognition of this condition compared to adult FM and the difficulties with enrollment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01328002 ; NCT01331109.

More ubiquitous effects from non-pharmacologic than from pharmacologic treatments for fibromyalgia syndrome: a meta-analysis examining six core symptoms

This study aimed to characterize and compare the efficacy profile on six fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) core symptoms associated with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments. We screened PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for FM articles from 1990 to September 2012 to analyse randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic treatments to placebo or sham. Papers including assessments of at least 2 of the 6 main FM symptom domains - pain, sleep disturbance, fatigue, affective symptoms (depression/anxiety), functional deficit and cognitive impairment - were selected for analysis. Studies exploring pharmacologic approaches (n = 21) were mainly dedicated to treating a small number of dimensions, mostly pain. They were of good quality but were not prospectively designed to simultaneously document efficacy for the management of multiple core FM symptom domains. Only amitriptyline demonstrated a significant effect on as many as three core FM symptoms, but it exhibited many adverse effects and was subject to early tachyphylaxis. Studies involving non-pharmacologic approaches (n = 64) were typically of poorer quality but were more often dedicated to multidimensional targets. Pool therapy demonstrated significant effects on five symptom domains, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on four domains, balneotherapy on three domains and exercise, cognitive behaviour therapy and massage on two domains each. Differences between pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches may be related to different modes of action, tolerability profiles and study designs. Very few drugs in well-designed clinical trials have demonstrated significant relief for multiple FM symptom domains, whereas non-pharmacologic treatments with weaker study designs have demonstrated multidimensional effects. Future therapeutic trials for FM should prospectively examine each of the core domains and should attempt to combine pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies in well-designed clinical trials.

Development and initial validation of a brief self-report measure of cognitive dysfunction in fibromyalgia

Pain is often the focus of research and clinical care in fibromyalgia (FM); however, cognitive dysfunction is also a common, distressing, and disabling symptom in FM. Current efforts to address this problem are limited by the lack of a comprehensive, valid measure of subjective cognitive dysfunction in FM that is easily interpretable, accessible, and brief. The purpose of this study was to leverage cognitive functioning item banks that were developed as part of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to devise a 10-item short form measure of cognitive functioning for use in FM. In study 1, a nationwide (U.S.) sample of 1,035 adults with FM (age range = 18-82, 95.2% female) completed 2 cognitive item pools. Factor analyses and item response theory analyses were used to identify dimensionality and optimally performing items. A recommended 10-item measure, called the Multidimensional Inventory of Subjective Cognitive Impairment (MISCI) was created. In study 2, 232 adults with FM completed the MISCI and a legacy measure of cognitive functioning that is used in FM clinical trials, the Multiple Ability Self-Report Questionnaire (MASQ). The MISCI showed excellent internal reliability, low ceiling/floor effects, and good convergent validity with the MASQ (r = -.82).

PERSPECTIVE

This paper presents the MISCI, a 10-item measure of cognitive dysfunction in FM, developed through classical test theory and item response theory. This brief but comprehensive measure shows evidence of excellent construct validity through large correlations with a lengthy legacy measure of cognitive functioning.

Pharmacological treatment of chronic non-cancer pain in pediatric patients

Chronic pain in children and young adults occurs frequently and contributes to early disability as well as personal and familial distress. A biopsychosocial approach to evaluation and treatment is recommended. Within this approach, there is a role for pharmacologic intervention. A variety of medications are used for chronic pain conditions in pediatric patients. Medication classes include anticonvulsants, muscle relaxants, antidepressants, opioids, local anesthetics, and anti-inflammatory drugs. Data is sparse, and most medications are used without condition-specific approval by national regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration in the US and the European Medicines Agency. In the absence of evidence on which to base practice, optimal drug therapy decisions rest on understanding proposed mechanisms of pain conditions, extrapolation from adult data-when such exists, and empirical and experiential knowledge. Drug delivery systems have evolved, and practitioners have to decide amongst not only medication classes, but also routes of delivery. Opioids are not recommended for use by non-pain specialists for the treatment of pediatric chronic pain, and even then the issues are more complex than can be addressed here. This article reviews the major medications used for pediatric chronic pain conditions.

Efficacy of long-term milnacipran treatment in patients meeting different thresholds of clinically relevant pain relief: subgroup analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled withdrawal study

Background

Fibromyalgia patients from a long-term, open-label study of milnacipran (50–200 mg/day) were eligible to participate in a 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal study. The withdrawal study evaluated loss of therapeutic response in patients who achieved ≥50% pain improvements after receiving up to 3.25 years of milnacipran. This post-hoc analysis investigated whether patients who met lower thresholds of pain improvement also experienced worsening of fibromyalgia symptoms upon treatment withdrawal.

Method

Among patients who received milnacipran ≥100 mg/day during the long-term study, three subgroups were identified based on percentage of pain reduction at randomization: ≥50% (protocol-defined “responders”; n=150); ≥30% to <50% (patients with clinically meaningful pain improvement; n=61); and <30% (n=110). Efficacy assessments included the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQR), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI).

Results

In the ≥30 to <50% subgroup, significant worsening in pain was detected after treatment withdrawal. The difference between placebo and milnacipran in mean VAS score changes for this subgroup (+9.0, P<0.05) was similar to the difference in protocol-defined responders (+9.4, P<0.05). In the <30% subgroup, no worsening in pain was observed in either treatment arm. However, patients in this subgroup experienced significant worsening in FIQR scores after treatment withdrawal (placebo, +6.9; milnacipran, −2.8; P<0.001), as well as worsening in SF-36 PCS and BDI scores.

Conclusion

Patients who experienced ≥30% to <50% pain reduction with long-term milnacipran had significant worsening of fibromyalgia symptoms after treatment withdrawal. These results suggest that the conventional ≥30% pain responder cutoff may be adequate to demonstrate efficacy in randomized withdrawal studies of fibromyalgia. Patients in the <30% pain reduction subgroup had worsening scores on the FIQR and other multidimensional measures after treatment withdrawal, indicating the importance of identifying and managing the multiple symptoms of fibromyalgia.

Beyond pain in fibromyalgia: insights into the symptom of fatigue

Fatigue is a disabling, multifaceted symptom that is highly prevalent and stubbornly persistent. Although fatigue is a frequent complaint among patients with fibromyalgia, it has not received the same attention as pain. Reasons for this include lack of standardized nomenclature to communicate about fatigue, lack of evidence-based guidelines for fatigue assessment, and a deficiency in effective treatment strategies. Fatigue does not occur in isolation; rather, it is present concurrently in varying severity with other fibromyalgia symptoms such as chronic widespread pain, unrefreshing sleep, anxiety, depression, cognitive difficulties, and so on. Survey-based and preliminary mechanistic studies indicate that multiple symptoms feed into fatigue and it may be associated with a variety of physiological mechanisms. Therefore, fatigue assessment in clinical and research settings must consider this multi-dimensionality. While no clinical trial to date has specifically targeted fatigue, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses indicate that treatment modalities studied in the context of other fibromyalgia symptoms could also improve fatigue. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Fibromyalgia Working Group and the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) have been instrumental in propelling the study of fatigue in fibromyalgia to the forefront. The ongoing efforts by PROMIS to develop a brief fibromyalgia-specific fatigue measure for use in clinical and research settings will help define fatigue, allow for better assessment, and advance our understanding of fatigue.

OMERACT-based fibromyalgia symptom subgroups: an exploratory cluster analysis

Introduction

The aim of this study was to identify subsets of patients with fibromyalgia with similar symptom profiles using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core symptom domains.

Methods

Female patients with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia and currently meeting fibromyalgia research survey criteria completed the Brief Pain Inventory, the 30-item Profile of Mood States, the Medical Outcomes Sleep Scale, the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, the Multiple Ability Self-Report Questionnaire, the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire–Revised (FIQ-R) and the Short Form-36 between 1 June 2011 and 31 October 2011. Hierarchical agglomerative clustering was used to identify subgroups of patients with similar symptom profiles. To validate the results from this sample, hierarchical agglomerative clustering was repeated in an external sample of female patients with fibromyalgia with similar inclusion criteria.

Results

A total of 581 females with a mean age of 55.1 (range, 20.1 to 90.2) years were included. A four-cluster solution best fit the data, and each clustering variable differed significantly (P <0.0001) among the four clusters. The four clusters divided the sample into severity levels: Cluster 1 reflects the lowest average levels across all symptoms, and cluster 4 reflects the highest average levels. Clusters 2 and 3 capture moderate symptoms levels. Clusters 2 and 3 differed mainly in profiles of anxiety and depression, with Cluster 2 having lower levels of depression and anxiety than Cluster 3, despite higher levels of pain. The results of the cluster analysis of the external sample (n = 478) looked very similar to those found in the original cluster analysis, except for a slight difference in sleep problems. This was despite having patients in the validation sample who were significantly younger (P <0.0001) and had more severe symptoms (higher FIQ-R total scores (P = 0.0004)).

Conclusions

In our study, we incorporated core OMERACT symptom domains, which allowed for clustering based on a comprehensive symptom profile. Although our exploratory cluster solution needs confirmation in a longitudinal study, this approach could provide a rationale to support the study of individualized clinical evaluation and intervention.

Milnacipran effects on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate in fibromyalgia patients: a randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize milnacipran effects on systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) in fibromyalgia patients using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM).

METHODS

This dose-escalation study included a 7-week double-blind treatment period and 2-week single-blind discontinuation period. Patients were randomized 2:1 to milnacipran (n = 210) or placebo (n = 111), with 50% of patients classified as 'hypertensive' at baseline (SBP ≥130 mmHg, DBP ≥85 mmHg, or current antihypertensive medication). Analyses were conducted at Weeks 4 and 7, after milnacipran dosages were escalated to 100 and 200 mg/day, respectively. Outcome measures included changes from baseline in mean ambulatory SBP, DBP, and heart rate for the 12-hour periods following the morning dose (post-AM dose) or evening dose (post-PM dose), and the entire 24-hour monitoring period. Primary outcome parameter was change from baseline in mean SBP for the 12-hour period post-AM dose. Safety analyses included adverse events and sitting vital sign readings taken at study visits.

RESULTS

Milnacipran increased ABPM vital signs at Week 4 (100 mg/day) and Week 7 (200 mg/day). Increases in the 12-hour period post-AM dose were similar at Weeks 4 and 7 (both visits: SBP and DBP, 4 to 5 mmHg; HR, 13 to 14 bpm). Mean increases in ambulatory vital signs were generally comparable between hypertensive and normotensive patients over 24-hour periods. Normal patterns of diurnal variation in blood pressure and heart rate were maintained in patients receiving milnacipran. Sitting vital signs were consistent with ABPM findings. Nausea was the most common adverse event observed with milnacipran.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibromyalgia patients receiving milnacipran in this ABPM study had mean increases in blood pressure and heart rate that were consistent with those observed in clinical efficacy trials. Diurnal variation was preserved and changes were not greater in hypertensive patients than in non-hypertensive patients. These findings cannot necessarily be generalized to other patient populations.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT00618956).

Decreased physical activity attributable to higher body mass index influences fibromyalgia symptoms

BACKGROUND

Although previous studies report associations between increased body mass index (BMI) and fibromyalgia symptoms, there is uncertainty as to whether this relationship is driven by physical factors, psychological factors, or both.

OBJECTIVE

To assess these relationships in a clinical sample of patients with fibromyalgia.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Tertiary care facility.

PATIENTS

A total of 686 patients from an existing national fibromyalgia registry.

METHODS

Patients completed a demographic form and self-report questionnaires including the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQ-R), the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and the 30-item Profile of Mood States (30-item POMS).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

FIQ-R overall impact subscale.

RESULTS

BMI was significantly correlated with fibromyalgia impact (P < .001). The relationship between BMI and fibromyalgia impact was almost fully accounted for by physical factors and not by psychological factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite patient report that pain hinders physical activity, clinicians who encounter patients with fibromyalgia, particularly patients with increased BMI, should be cognizant of the need to invest time and resources to counsel patients on physical factors (ie, physical activity) that could improve the patients' symptom experience.

Juvenile fibromyalgia: current status of research and future developments

Juvenile-onset fibromyalgia (JFM) is a poorly understood chronic pain condition most commonly affecting adolescent girls. The condition is characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain and other associated symptoms, including fatigue, nonrestorative sleep, headaches, irritable bowel symptoms, dysautonomia and mood disorders such as anxiety and/or depression. In the past few years, there has been a greater focus on understanding JFM in adolescents. Research studies have provided insight into the clinical characteristics of this condition and its effect on both short-term and long-term psychosocial and physical functioning. The importance of early and effective intervention is being recognized, as research has shown that symptoms of JFM tend to persist and do not resolve over time as was previously believed. Efforts to improve treatments for JFM are underway, and new evidence strongly points to the potential benefits of cognitive-behavioural therapy on improving mood and daily functioning. Research into pharmacotherapy and other nonpharmacological options is in progress. Advancements in the understanding of adult fibromyalgia have paved the way for future studies on diagnosis, assessment and management of JFM. This Review focuses on our current knowledge of the condition, provides an update of the latest research advances, and highlights areas for further study.

Continuing efficacy of milnacipran following long-term treatment in fibromyalgia: a randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies of long-term treatment response in fibromyalgia and other chronic pain states have generally been limited to approximately one year, leaving questions about the longer-term durability of response. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate continuing efficacy of milnacipran by characterizing changes in pain and other fibromyalgia symptoms after discontinuing long-term treatment. The mean length of milnacipran treatment at the time of randomized withdrawal was 36.1 months from initial exposure to milnacipran (range, 17.9 to 54.4 months).

METHODS

After completing a long-term, open-label, lead-in study of milnacipran (which followed varying periods of exposure in previous studies), adult patients with fibromyalgia entered the four-week open-label period of the current study for evaluation of ongoing treatment response. After the four-week period to confirm new baseline status, 151 patients taking milnacipran ≥100 mg/day and reporting ≥50% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores were classified as responders. These responders entered the 12-week, double-blind withdrawal period in which they were randomized 2:1 to continue milnacipran or switched to placebo. The prespecified primary parameter was loss of therapeutic response (LTR), defined as increase in VAS pain score to <30% reduction from pre-milnacipran exposure or worsening of fibromyalgia requiring alternative treatment. Adverse events and vital signs were also monitored.

RESULTS

Time to LTR was shorter in patients randomized to placebo than in patients continuing milnacipran (P < 0.001). Median time to LTR was 56 days with placebo and was not calculable for milnacipran, because less than half of the latter group of patients lost therapeutic response by study end. Additionally, 81% of patients continuing on milnacipran maintained clinically meaningful pain response (≥30% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure), compared with 58% of patients switched to placebo (sensitivity analysis II; P < 0.001). The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were 58% and 47% for placebo and milnacipran, respectively. Mean decreases in blood pressure and heart rate were found in both groups, with greater decreases for patients switched to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing efficacy of milnacipran was demonstrated by the loss of effect following withdrawal of treatment in patients who received an average of three years of milnacipran treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01014585.

Milnacipran combined with pregabalin in fibromyalgia: a randomized, open-label study evaluating the safety and efficacy of adding milnacipran in patients with incomplete response to pregabalin

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of adding milnacipran to pregabalin in patients with fibromyalgia who have experienced an incomplete response to pregabalin.

METHODS

In this randomized, multicenter, open-label study, patients received pregabalin 300 or 450 mg/day during a 4- to 12-week run-in period. Patients with weekly recall visual analog scale (VAS) pain score of at least 40 and up to 90, Patient Global Impression of Severity score of at least 4, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) score of at least 3 were classified as incomplete responders and randomized to continue pregabalin alone (n = 180) or receive milnacipran 100 mg/day added to pregabalin (n = 184). The primary efficacy parameter was responder status based on PGIC score of up to 2. The secondary efficacy parameter was change from randomization in weekly recall VAS pain score. Safety parameters included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and clinical laboratory tests.

RESULTS

The percentage of PGIC responders was significantly higher with milnacipran added to pregabalin (46.4%) than with pregabalin alone (20.8%; p < 0.001). Mean improvement from randomization in weekly recall VAS pain scores was greater in patients receiving milnacipran added to pregabalin (-20.77) than in patients receiving pregabalin alone (-6.43; p < 0.001). During the run-in period, the most common treatment-emergent AEs with pregabalin were dizziness (22.8%), somnolence (17.3%), and fatigue (9.1%). During the randomized period, the most common treatment-emergent AEs with milnacipran added to pregabalin were nausea (12.5%), fatigue (10.3%), and constipation (9.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this exploratory, open-label study, adding milnacipran to pregabalin improved global status, pain, and other symptoms in patients with fibromyalgia with an incomplete response to pregabalin treatment.

Fibromyalgia syndrome--novel therapeutic targets

Fibromyalgia is a syndrome characterized by the presence of chronic widespread pain, representing sensitization of the central nervous system. The pthophysiology of fibromyalgia is a complex and remains in evolution, encompassing diverse issues such as disturbed patterns of sleep, alter processing and decreased conditioned pain modulation at the spinal level, as well as increased connectivity between various pain - processing areas of the brain. This evolution is continuously uncovering potential novel therapeutic targets. Treatment of fibromyalgia is a multi - faceted endeavor, inevitably combining pharmacological as well as non - pharmacological approaches. 2δ ligands and selective nor-epinephrine - serotonin reuptake inhibitors are the current mainstays of pharmacological treatment. Novel re-uptake inhibitors targeting both nor -epinephrine and dopamine are potential additions to this armamentarium as are substance P antagonists, Opiod antagonism is another intriguing possibility. Canabinoid agonists hold promise in the treatment of fibromyalgia although current evidence is incomplete. Sodium Oxybate is a unique sleep - promoting medication while drugs those promot arousals such as modafilnil are also under investigation. In the current review, current and emerging therapeutic options for the syndrome of fibromyalgia are covered.

Interpreting effect sizes and clinical relevance of pharmacological interventions for fibromyalgia

Duloxetine, milnacipran, and pregabalin are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the management of fibromyalgia. A number of meta-analyses, pooled analyses, and systematic reviews have been published in recent years involving the efficacy of these three medications for pain in fibromyalgia. Despite being based on the same clinical data, some analyses found these treatments to have a clinically relevant effect on pain, while others concluded that the advantages were small or of questionable clinical relevance. This commentary discussed possible reasons behind these differing conclusions and explored ways of evaluating the clinical relevance of pharmacological treatments for fibromyalgia. In particular, we considered: (1) the importance of judicious and careful interpretation of average treatment effect size and the recognition that average treatment effect sizes do not always tell the whole story; (2) the utility of individual patient response data to assess clinical relevance; and (3) the importance of considering pain reduction within the context of other benefits due to the presence of associated symptoms in patients with fibromyalgia.

Milnacipran for fibromyalgia: a useful addition to the treatment armamentarium

INTRODUCTION

Antidepressants are used to treat a variety of chronic pain conditions including peripheral neuropathy, headache, and more recently, fibromyalgia. The antidepressant milnacipran blocks the reuptake of norepinephrine and serotonin and is used for the management of fibromyalgia.

AREAS COVERED

The article contains data primarily obtained from the MEDLINE database using a PubMed search of the keywords including milnacipran, fibromyalgia and depression. Of the available serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, milnacipran has greater potency in inhibiting reuptake of norepinephrine relative to serotonin and is proposed to work by attenuating pain signals. Milnacipran is well tolerated and effective for fibromyalgia pain when given in divided doses of 100 - 200 mg daily. Studies show that milnacipran may be effective for fibromyalgia-associated symptoms including depression and fatigue.

EXPERT OPINION

Milnacipran provides modest fibromyalgia pain relief and is best used as part of a multidisciplinary treatment approach. While milnacipran was not studied in fibromyalgia patients with major depression, it may be a wise choice for fibromyalgia patients with depressive symptoms and patients for whom sedation, dizziness, edema or weight gain with gabapentin and pregabalin is a problem. Milnacipran has been found to be beneficial for treating some troublesome fibromyalgia-associated symptoms, including fatigue and cognitive dysfunction.

[Psychopharmacological treatment in patients with somatoform disorders and functional body syndromes]

Somatoform disorders and functional body syndromes define a major, diagnostically heterogeneous group of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms. Psychopharmacological approaches can be derived from the conceptualization of somatoform symptoms and syndromes within a biopsychosocial model. The survey presented focuses on randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies. Antidepressants show a statistically and clinically relevant impact on many somatoform symptoms. In special reference to pain symptoms serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants seem to mediate a more favorable effect than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. For some functional body syndromes, e.g. irritable bowel syndrome and fibromyalgia, a major analgesic effect of antidepressants can be underlined as well. The empirical data for fibromyalgia, however, seem to be more convincing than for irritable bowel syndrome. Pregabalin holds an empirically well established position in the treatment of fibromyalgia. As yet there is no convincing psychopharmacological strategy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Probably due to the inherent relationships to anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and depressive disorders, both hypochondria and body dysmorphic disorder can be positively treated by serotonergic antidepressants as well.

Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia syndrome

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. Patients often report high disability levels and poor quality of life (QOL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo for treating FMS symptoms in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2012), EMBASE (1980 to September 2012), www.clinicalstudyresults.org (U.S.-marketed pharmaceuticals) (to September 2012) and www.clinicaltrials.gov (to September 2012) for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo for the treatment of FMS in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data from the included studies, and assessed the risks of bias of the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies were included with a total of 6038 participants. Five studies investigated duloxetine against placebo, and five investigated milnacipran against placebo. A total of 3611 participants were included into duloxetine or milnacipran groups and 2427 participants into placebo groups. The studies had a low risk of bias in general. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a small incremental effect over placebo in reducing pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to -0.18; 6.1% relative improvement). One-hundred and ninety-two participants per 1000 on placebo reported an at least 50% pain reduction compared to 280 per 1000 on SNRIs (Risk ratio (RR) 1.49, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.64; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 9 to 15). Duloxetine and milnacipran did not reduce fatigue substantially (SMD -0.14; 95% CI -0.19 to -0.08; 2.5% relative improvement; NNTB 17, 95% CI 12 to 29), and did not improve QOL substantially (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.25 to -0.14; 4.6% relative improvement; NNTB 12, 95% CI 9 to 17) compared to placebo. There were no statistically significant differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95% CI -0.16 to 0.03; 2.5% relative improvement). One-hundred and seven participants per 1000 on placebo dropped out due to adverse events compared to 196 per 1000 on SNRIs. The dropout rate due to adverse events in the duloxetine and milnacipran groups was statistically significantly higher than in placebo groups (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.18; number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 11, 95% CI 9 to 13). There was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.12).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided a small incremental benefit over placebo in reducing pain. The superiority of duloxetine and milnacipran over placebo in reducing fatigue and limitations of QOL was not substantial. Duloxetine and milnacipran were not superior to placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. The most frequently reported symptoms leading to stopping medication were nausea, dry mouth, constipation, headache, somnolence/dizziness and insomnia. Rare complications of both drugs may include suicidality, liver damage, abnormal bleeding, elevated blood pressure and urinary hesitation.

[Drug therapy of fibromyalgia syndrome. Systematic review, meta-analysis and guideline]

BACKGROUND

The scheduled update to the German S3 guidelines on fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies ("Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften", AWMF; registration number 041/004) was planned starting in March 2011.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The development of the guidelines was coordinated by the German Interdisciplinary Association for Pain Therapy ("Deutsche Interdisziplinären Vereinigung für Schmerztherapie", DIVS), 9 scientific medical societies and 2 patient self-help organizations. Eight working groups with a total of 50 members were evenly balanced in terms of gender, medical field, potential conflicts of interest and hierarchical position in the medical and scientific fields. Literature searches were performed using the Medline, PsycInfo, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases (until December 2010). The grading of the strength of the evidence followed the scheme of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The recommendations were based on level of evidence, efficacy (meta-analysis of the outcomes pain, sleep, fatigue and health-related quality of life), acceptability (total dropout rate), risks (adverse events) and applicability of treatment modalities in the German health care system. The formulation and grading of recommendations was accomplished using a multi-step, formal consensus process. The guidelines were reviewed by the boards of the participating scientific medical societies.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Amitriptyline and-in case of comorbid depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder-duloxetine are recommended. Off-label use of duloxetine and pregabalin can be considered in case of no comorbid mental disorder. Strong opioids are not recommended. The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under "Supplemental").

The antinociceptive effect of milnacipran in the monosodium iodoacetate model of osteoarthritis pain and its relation to changes in descending inhibition

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic joint disorder whose principal symptom is chronic pain. Current analgesics are inadequate and the mechanisms contributing to this pain are poorly understood but likely to include both local joint changes and central consequences. These studies used monoamine receptor agents combined with behavioral studies and single-unit dorsal horn recordings to examine whether descending noradrenergic and serotonergic inhibitions are altered in the monosodium iodoacetate model of OA pain, and whether increasing these inhibitions with the serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor milnacipran can attenuate the attendant hypersensitivity. Early and late in the course of this model, milnacipran (s.c.) reduced behavioral hypersensitivity, and inhibited evoked responses from sensitized dorsal horn neurons. In naïve animals and the early, but not late, phase of the model, spinal administration of the α(2)-adrenoceptor antagonist atipamezole fully reversed this neuronal inhibition, whereas atipamezole administered alone revealed that endogenous noradrenergic inhibition was reduced in the late phase. Blocking spinal 5-hydroxytryptamine-7 receptors with (2R)-1-[(3-hydroxyphenyl)sulfonyl]-2-[2-(4-methyl-1-piperidinyl)ethyl]pyrrolidine hydrochloride suggested that the effects of milnacipran in the late phase were partly mediated by these receptors, and that descending serotonergic inhibition was increased in this phase. An opioidergic mechanism behind the effects of milnacipran was indicated by a partial reversal of these effects with naloxone. These studies demonstrate antinociceptive effects for milnacipran in a model of OA pain, whose effects come via descending serotonergic and noradrenergic, as well as opioidergic, pathways. Variations in the activity of these pathways over the course of this model may contribute to the presence of behavioral hypersensitivity and determine through which endogenous systems milnacipran exerts its effects.

Imputing productivity gains from clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To respond to employer and payer interest in the extent to which productivity gains offset therapy costs by identifying clinical trials that did not include such measures and using their clinical data to impute productivity impact.

METHODS

A PubMed search identified the sample of 25 clinical trials of musculoskeletal pain medications and antidepressants. Next, we applied regression coefficients, quantifying the empirical relationship between clinical measures to each trial's clinical outcomes data. This validated methodology provides estimates of Work Limitations Questionnaire Productivity Loss scores.

RESULTS

Based on imputation, musculoskeletal medications and antidepressants achieved median productivity gains of approximately 0.5% and 1.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Accounting for productivity gains based on the Work Limitations Questionnaire could substantially influence cost-effectiveness results reported in the health economics literature.

Effect of milnacipran on body weight in patients with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of milnacipran on body weight in patients with fibromyalgia.

METHODS

ANALYSES WERE CONDUCTED IN THE FOLLOWING GROUPS: patients from three double-blind, placebo-controlled milnacipran trials (3 months, n = 2096; 6 months, n = 1008); 354 patients receiving milnacipran in placebo-controlled trials and double-blind extension studies (total ≥ 12 months of treatment); and 1227 patients in a long-term (up to 3.25 years) open-label milnacipran study.

RESULTS

In placebo-controlled trials, 77% of patients were overweight or obese at baseline (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m(2)). Mean weight loss was found with milnacipran at 3 months (100 mg/day, -1.14 kg; 200 mg/day, -0.97 kg; placebo, -0.06 kg; P < 0.001) and 6 months (100 mg/day, -1.01 kg; 200 mg/day, -0.71 kg; placebo, -0.04 kg; P < 0.05). Approximately twice as many milnacipran-treated patients had ≥5% weight loss from baseline compared with placebo (3 and 6 months, P < 0.01). In extension studies, mean weight loss in patients receiving ≥12 months of milnacipran was -1.06 kg. In patients receiving ≥3 years of treatment in the open-label study, mean changes at 12, 24, 30, and 36-38 months were -1.16, -0.76, -0.19, and +0.11 kg, respectively. Among milnacipran-treated patients, rates of nausea (the most common adverse event) were lower among patients who lost weight than among those who did not (3 months, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with fibromyalgia in the milnacipran studies were overweight or obese. Milnacipran was associated with mean weight loss at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.05 versus placebo) and at 12 and 24 months of treatment, with mean changes drifting back to baseline at 30 months (-0.19 kg) and 36-38 months (+0.11 kg, no placebo comparison).

Safety and efficacy of esreboxetine in patients with fibromyalgia: a fourteen-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of multiple fixed dosages of esreboxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia.

METHODS

Patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized to receive esreboxetine at dosages of 4 mg/day (n=277), 8 mg/day (n=284), or 10 mg/day (n=283) or matching placebo (n=278) for 14 weeks. The primary efficacy outcomes were the weekly mean pain score and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score at week 14. Secondary efficacy measures included scores for the Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale, the Global Fatigue Index (GFI), and the 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36; physical function scale only) at week 14. The safety profile of esreboxetine was evaluated based on adverse events and other safety measures.

RESULTS

Patients receiving all dosages of esreboxetine demonstrated statistically significant improvements in the pain score (P≤0.025), the FIQ score (P≤0.023), and the PGIC score (P≤0.007) compared with patients in the placebo group. Additionally, patients receiving esreboxetine at dosages of 4 mg/day and 8 mg/day showed statistically significant improvements in the GFI score compared with those receiving placebo (P=0.001). No significant differences in SF-36 physical function scores were observed between patients receiving esreboxetine (any dosage) and those receiving placebo. Adverse events were mostly mild to moderate in severity; insomnia, constipation, dry mouth, nausea, dizziness, hot flush, headache, hyperhidrosis, and palpitations were reported most frequently.

CONCLUSION

Esreboxetine was generally well tolerated and was associated with significant improvements in pain, FIQ, PGIC, and fatigue scores compared with placebo. The lack of a dose-response relationship in both the efficacy and safety analyses suggests that esreboxetine at a dosage of 4 mg/day would offer clinical benefit with the least risk of drug exposure.

Development of responder definitions for fibromyalgia clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To develop responder definitions for fibromyalgia (FM) clinical trials using key symptom and function domains.

METHODS

Twenty-four candidate responder definitions were developed by expert consensus and were evaluated in 12 randomized, placebo-controlled trials of 4 medications for the treatment of FM. For each definition, the treatment effects of the medication compared with placebo were analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests or chi-square tests. A meta-analysis of the pooled results for the 4 medications established risk ratios to determine the definitions that best favored medication over placebo.

RESULTS

Two definitions performed best in the analyses. Both definitions included ≥30% reduction in pain and ≥10% improvement in physical function. The definitions differed in that one (≥30% improvement in FM [FM30] short version) included ≥30% improvement in sleep or fatigue, and the other (FM30 long version) required ≥30% improvement in 2 of the following symptoms: sleep, fatigue, depression, anxiety, or cognition. In the analysis of both versions, the response rate was ≥15% for each medication and was significantly greater compared with placebo. The risk ratio favoring drug over placebo in the pooled analysis for FM30 version 3 (short version) was 1.50 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.24-1.82; P ≤ 0.0001); the risk ratio for FM30 version 6 (long version) was 1.60 (95% CI 1.31-1.96; P ≤ 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Among the 24 responder definitions tested, 2 were identified as most sensitive in identifying response to treatment. The identification of responder definitions for FM clinical trials that include assessments of key symptom and function domains may improve the sensitivity of clinical trials to identify meaningful improvements, leading to improved management of FM.