1
|
Benebo FO, Lukic M, Jakobsen MD, Braaten TB. The role of lifestyle factors in the association between education and self-reported fibromyalgia: a mediation analysis. BMC Womens Health 2024; 24:244. [PMID: 38632566 PMCID: PMC11022321 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-024-03060-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/19/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Socioeconomic status as measured by education, income, or occupation, has been associated with fibromyalgia but the underlying mechanism and the role of lifestyle factors are unclear. Thus, we examine the role of modifiable lifestyle factors (body mass index, physical activity, alcohol consumption and smoking) in the association between education and self-reported fibromyalgia. METHODS We used data from 74,157 participants in the population-based prospective Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) study. Socioeconomic position, operationalized as years of educational attainment, and lifestyle factors were assessed via self-reported questionnaires. Multiple mediation analysis was used to decompose total effects into direct and indirect effects. Estimates were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS The cumulative incidence of fibromyalgia was 3.2% after a median follow up time of 13 years. Fibromyalgia was inversely associated with years of educational attainment for ≤ 9 years (HR = 2.56; 95% CI 2.32-2.91) and for 10-12 years (HR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.72-2.02), compared with ≥ 13 years of education. Overall, all lifestyle factors together jointly mediated 17.3% (95% CI 14.3-21.6) and 14.1% (95% CI 11.3-18.9) of the total effect for ≤ 9 years and 10-12 years of education, respectively. Smoking and alcohol consumption contributed the most to the proportion mediated, for ≤ 9 years (5.0% and 7.0%) and 10-12 years (5.6% and 4.5%) of education. CONCLUSION The association between education and self-reported fibromyalgia was partly explained through lifestyle factors, mainly smoking and alcohol consumption.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Faith Owunari Benebo
- Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Artic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
| | - Marko Lukic
- Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Artic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nagakura Y, Hayashi M, Kajioka S. Analysis of Japanese nationwide health datasets: association between lifestyle habits and prevalence of neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia with reference to dementia-related diseases and Parkinson's disease. Scand J Pain 2023; 23:662-669. [PMID: 37439280 DOI: 10.1515/sjpain-2023-0010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Chronic pain is defined as pain that persists or recurs for more than 3 months. This study focuses on neuropathic pain (NP) and fibromyalgia (FM) which are chronic pain states, and aims to identify lifestyle habits associated with their prevalence. Other neurological disorders are also analyzed as references. METHODS Association between the variable referring to disease prevalence (number of claims for reimbursement of marker drugs) and the variable for lifestyle habits/health examination results (collected from insured individuals aged 40-74 years) was determined by analyzing Japanese nationwide datasets, which were collected in 2018 and aggregated by prefecture. Pregabalin, donepezil, and levodopa were used as marker drugs for the chronic pain states, dementia-related diseases (Alzheimer's disease and Lewy body dementia) and Parkinson's disease (PD), respectively. Pearson's correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis were conducted. RESULTS Variables showing correlation coefficient (|r|)>0.5 were put into the multiple linear regression. Exercise habits (ꞵ=-0.3182), smoking habits (0.3218), daily drinking (0.2683), and alanine aminotransferase>51 U/L (0.2309) were finally incorporated in the equation for pregabalin (R 2=0.7268). Walking speed (-0.4543) and daily drinking (0.5077) were incorporated in the equation for donepezil (R 2=0.5718). CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of chronic pain states is associated with lifestyle habits, just like the dementia-related diseases. Exercise in daily life is negatively associated with the prevalence of the chronic pain states, although excessive alcohol drinking, smoking, and high serum ALT are positively associated with it. The prevalence of PD seems less associated with lifestyle habits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yukinori Nagakura
- School of Pharmacy at Fukuoka, International University of Health and Welfare, Okawa-City, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Maya Hayashi
- The Ministry of Justice in Japan, Correction Bureau, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shunichi Kajioka
- School of Pharmacy at Fukuoka, International University of Health and Welfare, Okawa-City, Fukuoka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Benebo FO, Lukic M, Jakobsen MD, Braaten TB. Lifestyle risk factors of self-reported fibromyalgia in the Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) study. BMC Public Health 2023; 23:1967. [PMID: 37821848 PMCID: PMC10566054 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-16773-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND While the aetiology of fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) remains unknown, lifestyle factors have been linked to the disorder. However, there are few studies on the association between lifestyle factors and FM, thus we examine the risk of self-reported fibromyalgia given selected lifestyle factors. METHODS We used data from 75,485 participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study. Information on FM and the lifestyle factors body mass index (BMI), physical activity level, smoking status/intensity, and alcohol consumption were obtained from baseline and follow-up questionnaires. We used Cox proportional hazards model to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS After a median follow-up time of 10 years, we observed 2,248 cases of self-reported fibromyalgia. Overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) women had a relative risk of 1.34 (95% CI 1.21-1.47) and 1.62 (95% CI 1.41-1.87), respectively, compared to women with normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2). Very low physical activity level (1-2) was associated with a 31% higher risk of self-reported fibromyalgia (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.09-1.57) when compared to moderate physical activity level (5-6). There was a strong dose-response relationship between smoking status/intensity and self-reported fibromyalgia (p for trend < 0.001). Compared with moderate alcohol consumption (4.0-10 g/day), the risk of self-reported FM was 72% (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.45-2.03) higher among teetotallers, and 38% (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.23-1.54) higher among those with low consumption (0.1-3.9 g/day). CONCLUSIONS Overweight and obesity, very low physical activity level, smoking, and alcohol consumption were associated with an increased risk of self-reported FM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Faith Owunari Benebo
- Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Artic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
| | - Marko Lukic
- Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Artic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Creed F. The risk factors for self-reported fibromyalgia with and without multiple somatic symptoms: The Lifelines cohort study. J Psychosom Res 2022; 155:110745. [PMID: 35123251 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2022.110745] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Revised: 01/12/2022] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The numerous risk factors for fibromyalgia reflect its heterogeneous nature. This study assessed whether the predictors of fibromyalgia onset vary according to number of prior somatic symptoms. METHODS The prospective, population-based Lifelines cohort study included 138,617 adults without fibromyalgia or marked muscle pain. At baseline socio-demographic status, physical and psychiatric disorders, psycho-social and behavioural variables were assessed as potential predictors. At follow-up (mean 2.4 years later) new onsets of fibromyalgia were recorded by self-report. The predictors of new onsets of self-reported fibromyalgia were assessed using logistic regression with interaction terms between key variables and number of somatic symptoms. RESULTS At follow-up 679 (0.5%) participants reported new onset fibromyalgia. The strongest predictors were: female sex, rheumatoid and osteo-arthritis, IBS, impaired sleep, migraine, few years of education and impairment by bodily pain. Interaction terms with somatic symptoms were significant for years of education, low income, rheumatoid arthritis and no. of analgesics; these were predictors only for fibromyalgia with few somatic symptoms. Participants with multiple somatic symptoms had a higher number of predictors than those with few somatic symptoms. CONCLUSION This study suggests that people developing self-reported fibromyalgia with multiple pre-existing somatic symptoms have a high risk factor load reflecting risk factors for both fibromyalgia and multiple somatic symptoms. Self-reported fibromyalgia with few somatic symptoms has fewer predictors which may be specific to fibromyalgia. Future research could usefully study whether different pathophysiological mechanisms occur when fibromyalgia is preceded by high or low number of somatic symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francis Creed
- Emeritus Professor of Psychological Medicine, Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mast cell stabilizer ketotifen fumarate reverses inflammatory but not neuropathic-induced mechanical pain in mice. Pain Rep 2021; 6:e902. [PMID: 34104835 PMCID: PMC8177879 DOI: 10.1097/pr9.0000000000000902] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Our preclinical findings indicate that ketotifen fumarate's analgesic effects are MC-dependent, and the case series report presented supports its use for the treatment of chronic pain. Introduction: Mast cell (MC) activation could establish a positive feedback loop that perpetuates inflammation and maintains pain. Stabilizing MCs with ketotifen fumarate (KF) may disrupt this loop and relieve pain. Objective: We aimed to test the effect of treatment with KF in pain assays in mice and in a case series of patients with chronic widespread pain. Methods: The analgesic effect of KF was tested in CD-1 mice injected with formalin, complete Freund's adjuvant, or subjected to spared nerve injury. In addition, wild-type (C57BL/6) and MC-deficient (C57BL/6-KitW-sh/W-sh) mice were injected with formalin or complete Freund's adjuvant and treated with KF. Patients with chronic widespread pain (n = 5; age: 13–16 years) who failed to respond to standard of care participated in a 16-week treatment trial with KF (6 mg/d). Ketotifen fumarate's therapeutic effect was evaluated using the patient global impression of change. Results: In the mouse experiments, KF produced dose- and MC-dependent analgesic effects against mechanical allodynia in the acute and chronic inflammatory pain but not neuropathic pain assays. In the patient case series, 4 patients reported that activity limitations, symptoms, emotions, and overall quality of life related to their pain condition were “better” or “a great deal better” since beginning treatment with KF. This was accompanied by improvements in pain comorbid symptoms. Conclusion: Treatment with KF is capable of reducing established inflammatory-induced mechanical nociception in an MC-dependent manner in mice, and it may be beneficial for the treatment of chronic pain conditions.
Collapse
|
6
|
Guerriero F, Reid MC. Linking Persistent Pain and Frailty in Older Adults. PAIN MEDICINE 2021; 21:61-66. [PMID: 31343692 DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnz174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In older adults, the impact of persistent pain goes beyond simple discomfort, often contributing to worsening functional outcomes and ultimately frailty. Frailty is a geriatric syndrome that, like persistent pain, increases in prevalence with age and is characterized by a decreased ability to adapt to common stressors such as acute illness, thereby increasing risk for multiple adverse health outcomes. Evidence supports a relationship between persistent pain and both the incidence and progression of frailty, independent of health, social, and lifestyle confounders. DESIGN AND SETTING In this article, we synthesize recent evidence linking persistent pain and frailty in an effort to clarify the nature of the relationship between these two commonly occurring geriatric syndromes. SETTING We propose an integration of the frailty phenotype model by considering the impact of persistent pain on vulnerability toward external stressors, which can ultimately contribute to frailty in older adults. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Incorporating persistent pain into the frailty construct can help us better understand frailty and ultimately improve care for patients with, as well as those at increased risk for, pain and frailty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio Guerriero
- Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Therapy, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - M C Reid
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
A review of the incidence and risk factors for fibromyalgia and chronic widespread pain in population-based studies. Pain 2020; 161:1169-1176. [DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|
8
|
Häuser W, Welsch P, Klose P, Derry S, Straube S, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA. Pharmacological therapies for fibromyalgia in adults ‐ an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 2018:CD013151. [PMCID: PMC6516969 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2023]
Abstract
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Overview). The objectives are as follows: To provide an overview of the therapeutic efficacy of pharmacological therapies for fibromyalgia, and to report on adverse events associated with their use. The major comparison of interest will be with placebo.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Winfried Häuser
- Technische Universität MünchenDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and PsychotherapyLangerstr. 3MünchenGermanyD‐81675
| | - Patrick Welsch
- Health Care Center for Pain Medicine and Mental HealthSaarbrückenGermany
| | - Petra Klose
- University of Duisburg‐EssenDepartment of Internal and Integrative Medicine, Kliniken Essen‐Mitte, Faculty of MedicineAm Deimelsberg 34 aEssenGermanyD‐45276
| | | | - Sebastian Straube
- University of AlbertaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Preventive Medicine5‐30 University Terrace8303‐112 StreetEdmontonCanadaT6G 2T4
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterised by chronic widespread pain, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and fatigue. Many patients report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy aims to reduce key symptoms, especially pain, and improve quality of life. The tetracyclic antidepressant, mirtazapine, may help by increasing serotonin and noradrenaline in the central nervous system (CNS). OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of the tetracyclic antidepressant, mirtazapine, compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, SCOPUS, the US National Institutes of Health, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials, and examined reference lists of reviewed articles, to 9 July 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any formulation of mirtazapine against placebo, or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia, in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, outcomes of efficacy, tolerability and safety, examined issues of study quality, and assessed risk of bias, resolving discrepancies by discussion. Primary outcomes were participant-reported pain relief (at least 50% or 30% pain reduction), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC; much or very much improved), safety (serious adverse events), and tolerability (adverse event withdrawal). Other outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved by 20% or more, fatigue, sleep problems, mean pain intensity, negative mood and particular adverse events. We used a random-effects model to calculate risk difference (RD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and numbers needed to treat. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS Three studies with 606 participants compared mirtazapine with placebo (but not other drugs) over seven to 13 weeks. Two studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in six or seven of eight domains. We judged the evidence for all outcomes to be low- or very low-quality because of poor study quality, indirectness, imprecision, risk of publication bias, and sometimes low numbers of events.There was no difference between mirtazapine and placebo for any primary outcome: participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater (22% versus 16%; RD 0.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.12; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); no data available for PGIC; only a single serious adverse event for evaluation of safety (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; three studies with 606 participants; very low-quality evidence); and tolerability as frequency of dropouts due to adverse events (3% versus 2%; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence).Mirtazapine showed a clinically-relevant benefit compared to placebo for some secondary outcomes: participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater (47% versus 34%; RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.21; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 8, 95% CI 5 to 20; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported mean pain intensity (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.13; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); and participant-reported sleep problems (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.06; three studies with 573 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no benefit for improvement of participant-reported improvement of HRQoL of 20% or greater (58% versus 50%; RD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.16; three studies with 586 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported fatigue (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.16; two studies with 533 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported negative mood (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.44 to 0.10; three studies with 588 participants; low-quality evidence); or withdrawals due to lack of efficacy (1.5% versus 0.1%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; three studies with 605 participants; very low-quality evidence).There was no difference between mirtazapine and placebo for participants reporting any adverse event (76% versus 59%; RD 0.12, 95 CI -0.01 to 0.26; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence). There was a clinically-relevant harm with mirtazapine compared to placebo: in the number of participants with somnolence (42% versus 14%; RD 0.24, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.30; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 5, 95% CI 3 to 6; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence); weight gain (19% versus 1%; RD 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.23; NNTH 6, 95% CI 5 to 10; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence); and elevated alanine aminotransferase (13% versus 2%; RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.22; NNTH 8, 95% CI 5 to 25; two studies with 566 participants; low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Studies demonstrated no benefit of mirtazapine over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater, PGIC, improvement of HRQoL of 20% or greater, or reduction of fatigue or negative mood. Clinically-relevant benefits were shown for pain relief of 30% or greater, reduction of mean pain intensity, and sleep problems. Somnolence, weight gain, and elevated alanine aminotransferase were more frequent with mirtazapine than placebo. The quality of evidence was low or very low, with two of three studies of questionable quality and issues over indirectness and risk of publication bias. On balance, any potential benefits of mirtazapine in fibromyalgia were outweighed by its potential harms, though, a small minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically-relevant adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick Welsch
- Health Care Center for Pain Medicine and Mental Health, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Welsch P, Üçeyler N, Klose P, Walitt B, Häuser W. Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 2:CD010292. [PMID: 29489029 PMCID: PMC5846183 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010292.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick Welsch
- Health Care Center for Pain Medicine and Mental Health, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick Welsch
- Health Care Center for Pain Medicine and Mental Health; Saarbrücken Germany
| | - Kathrin Bernardy
- BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil GmbH, Ruhr University Bochum; Department of Pain Medicine; Cample-de-la Bürk Platz 1 Bochum Germany 44789
| | - Sheena Derry
- University of Oxford; Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics); Pain Research Unit Churchill Hospital Oxford Oxfordshire UK OX3 7LE
| | - R Andrew Moore
- University of Oxford; Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics); Pain Research Unit Churchill Hospital Oxford Oxfordshire UK OX3 7LE
| | - Winfried Häuser
- Technische Universität München; Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy; Langerstr. 3 München Germany D-81675
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Derry S, Wiffen PJ, Häuser W, Mücke M, Tölle TR, Bell RF, Moore RA. Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD012332. [PMID: 28349517 PMCID: PMC6464559 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012332.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used in the treatment of pain in fibromyalgia, despite being considered not to be effective. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy, tolerability (drop-out due to adverse events), and safety (serious adverse events) of oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from inception to January 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing any oral NSAID with placebo or another active treatment for relief of pain in fibromyalgia, with subjective pain assessment by the participant. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and potential bias. Primary outcomes were participants with substantial pain relief (at least 50% pain relief over baseline or very much improved on Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGIC)) or moderate pain relief (at least 30% pain relief over baseline or much or very much improved on PGIC), serious adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse events; secondary outcomes were adverse events, withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, and outcomes relating to sleep, fatigue, and quality of life. Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk difference (RD) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT), using standard methods. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS Our searches identified six randomised, double-blind studies involving 292 participants in suitably characterised fibromyalgia. The mean age of participants was between 39 and 50 years, and 89% to 100% were women. The initial pain intensity was around 7/10 on a 0 to 10 pain scale, indicating severe pain. NSAIDs tested were etoricoxib 90 mg daily, ibuprofen 2400 mg daily, naproxen 1000 mg daily, and tenoxicam 20 mg daily; 146 participants received NSAID and 146 placebo. The duration of treatment in the double-blind phase varied between three and eight weeks.Not all studies reported all the outcomes of interest. Analyses consistently showed no significant difference between NSAID and placebo: substantial benefit (at least 50% pain intensity reduction) (risk difference (RD) -0.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.18 to 0.04) 2 studies, 146 participants; moderate benefit (at least 30% pain intensity reduction) (RD -0.04 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.08) 3 studies, 192 participants; withdrawals due to adverse events (RD 0.04 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.09) 4 studies, 230 participants; participants experiencing any adverse event (RD 0.08 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.19) 4 studies, 230 participants; all-cause withdrawals (RD 0.03 (95% CI -0.07 to 0.14) 3 studies, 192 participants. There were no serious adverse events or deaths. Although most studies had some measures of health-related quality of life, fibromyalgia impact, or other outcomes, none reported the outcomes beyond saying that there was no or little difference between the treatment groups.We downgraded evidence on all outcomes to very low quality, meaning that this research does not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect. The likelihood that the effect could be substantially different is very high. This is based on the small numbers of studies, participants, and events, as well as other deficiencies of reporting study quality allowing possible risks of bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is only a modest amount of very low-quality evidence about the use of NSAIDs in fibromyalgia, and that comes from small, largely inadequate studies with potential risk of bias. That bias would normally be to increase the apparent benefits of NSAIDs, but no such benefits were seen. Consequently, NSAIDs cannot be regarded as useful for treating fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Winfried Häuser
- Technische Universität MünchenDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and PsychotherapyLangerstr. 3MünchenGermanyD‐81675
| | - Martin Mücke
- University Hospital of BonnDepartment of Palliative MedicineSigmund‐Freud‐Str. 25BonnGermany53127
| | - Thomas Rudolf Tölle
- Technische Universität MünchenDepartment of Neurology, Klinikum Rechts der IsarMöhlstrasse 28MunichGermany81675
| | - Rae Frances Bell
- Haukeland University HospitalRegional Centre of Excellence in Palliative CareBergenNorway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review replaces part of an earlier review that evaluated gabapentin for both neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, now split into separate reviews for the two conditions. This review will consider pain in fibromyalgia only.Fibromyalgia is associated with widespread pain lasting longer than three months, and is frequently associated with symptoms such as poor sleep, fatigue, depression, and reduced quality of life. Fibromyalgia is more common in women.Gabapentin is an antiepileptic drug widely licensed for treatment of neuropathic pain. It is not licensed for the treatment of fibromyalgia, but is commonly used because fibromyalgia can respond to the same medicines as neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy of gabapentin for fibromyalgia pain 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) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid and Embase via Ovid from inception to 24 May 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised, double-blind trials of eight weeks' duration or longer for treating fibromyalgia pain in adults, comparing gabapentin with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two independent review authors extracted data and assessed trial quality and risk of bias. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS Two studies tested gabapentin to treat fibromyalgia pain. One was identified in previous versions of the review and is included here. We identified another study as a conference abstract, with insufficient detail to determine eligibility for inclusion; it is awaiting assessment. The one included study of 150 participants was a 12-week, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study using last-observation-carried-forward imputation for withdrawals. The maximum dose was 2400 mg daily. The overall risk of bias was low, except for attrition bias.At the end of the trial, the outcome of 50% reduction in pain over baseline was not reported. The outcome of 30% or greater reduction in pain over baseline was achieved by 38/75 participants (49%) with gabapentin compared with 23/75 (31%) with placebo (very low quality). A patient global impression of change any category of "better" was achieved by 68/75 (91%) with gabapentin and 35/75 (47%) with placebo (very low quality).Nineteen participants discontinued the study because of adverse events: 12 in the gabapentin group (16%) and 7 in the placebo group (9%) (very low quality). The number of serious adverse events were not reported, and no deaths were reported (very low quality). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We have only very low quality evidence and are very uncertain about estimates of benefit and harm because of a small amount of data from a single trial. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that gabapentin reduces pain in fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tess E Cooper
- Pain Research Unit, Churchill HospitalCochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care GroupChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Sheena Derry
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Philip J Wiffen
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - R Andrew Moore
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Derry S, Cording M, Wiffen PJ, Law S, Phillips T, Moore RA. Pregabalin for pain in fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 9:CD011790. [PMID: 27684492 PMCID: PMC6457745 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011790.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane review on 'Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults' (Moore 2009), and considers only fibromyalgia pain.Antiepileptic drugs have been used in pain management since the 1960s. Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug also used in management of chronic pain conditions, including fibromyalgia. Pain response with pregabalin is associated with major benefits for other symptoms, and improved quality of life and function in people with chronic painful conditions. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of pregabalin for pain in fibromyalgia in adults, compared with placebo or any active comparator. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE for randomised controlled trials from inception to May 2009 for the original review and to 16 March 2016 for this update. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind trials of eight weeks' duration or longer, comparing pregabalin with placebo or another active treatment for relief of pain in fibromyalgia, and reporting on the analgesic effect of pregabalin, with subjective pain assessment by the participant. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and potential bias. Primary outcomes were participants with moderate pain relief (at least 30% pain relief over baseline or much or very much improved on Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGIC)) or substantial pain relief (at least 50% pain relief over baseline or very much improved on PGIC). Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat (NNT), using standard methods. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS Our searches identified two new published studies with classic design, and one new published study with an enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal (EERW) design.We included eight studies. Five (3283 participants) had a classic design in which participants were randomised at the start of the study to pregabalin (150, 300, 450, or 600 mg daily) or placebo, with assessment after 8 to 13 weeks of stable treatment. No studies included active comparators. Studies had low risk of bias, except that the last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation method used in analyses of the primary outcomes could overestimate treatment effect.Pregabalin increased the number of participants experiencing substantial benefit (at least 50% pain intensity reduction after 12 or 13 weeks' stable treatment (450 mg: RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.1, 1874 participants, 5 studies, high quality evidence)). Substantial benefit with pregabalin 300 to 600 mg was experienced by about 14% of participants with placebo, but about 9% more with pregabalin 300 to 600 mg (22% to 24%) (high quality evidence). Pregabalin increased the number of participants experiencing moderate benefit (at least 30% pain intensity reduction after 12 or 13 weeks' stable treatment) (450 mg: RR 1.5, 95% CI (1.3 to 1.7), 1874 participants, 5 studies, high quality evidence). Moderate benefit with pregabalin 300 to 600 mg was experienced by about 28% of participants with placebo, but about 11% more with pregabalin 300 to 600 mg (39% to 43%) (high quality evidence). A similar magnitude of effect was found using PGIC of 'very much improved' and 'much or very much improved'. NNTs for these outcomes ranged between 7 and 14 (high quality evidence).A small study (177 participants) compared nightly with twice-daily pregabalin, and concluded there was no difference in effect.Two studies (1492 participants began initial dose titration, 687 participants randomised) had an EERW design in which those with good pain relief after titration were randomised, double blind, to continuing the effective dose (300 to 600 mg pregabalin daily) or a short down-titration to placebo for 13 or 26 weeks. We calculated the outcome of maintained therapeutic response (MTR) without withdrawal, equivalent to a moderate benefit. Of those randomised, 40% had MTR with pregabalin and 20% with placebo (high quality evidence). The NNT was 5, but normalised to the starting population tested it was 12. About 10% of the initial population would have achieved the MTR outcome, similar to the result from studies of classic design. MTR had no imputation concerns.The majority (70% to 90%) of participants in all treatment groups experienced adverse events. Specific adverse events were more common with pregabalin than placebo, in particular dizziness, somnolence, weight gain, and peripheral oedema, with number needed to harm of 3.7, 7.4, 18, and 19 respectively for all doses combined (high quality evidence). Serious adverse events did not differ between active treatment groups and placebo (very low quality evidence). Withdrawals for any reason were more common with pregabalin than placebo only with the 600 mg dose in studies of classic design. Withdrawals due to adverse events were about 10% higher with pregabalin than placebo, but withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were about 6% lower (high quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Pregabalin 300 to 600 mg produces a major reduction in pain intensity over 12 to 26 weeks with tolerable adverse events for a small proportion of people (about 10% more than placebo) with moderate or severe pain due to fibromyalgia. The degree of pain relief is known to be accompanied by improvements in other symptoms, quality of life, and function. These results are similar to other effective medicines in fibromyalgia (milnacipran, duloxetine).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Simon Law
- The Churchill HospitalPain Relief UnitOxfordUKOX3 7LE
| | - Tudor Phillips
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Churchill HospitalOxfordUKOX3 7LJ
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review replaces part of an earlier review that evaluated oxycodone for both neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, which has now been split into separate reviews for the two conditions. This review will consider pain in fibromyalgia only.Opioid drugs are commonly used to treat fibromyalgia, but they may not be beneficial for people with this condition. Most reviews have examined all opioids together. This review sought evidence specifically for oxycodone, at any dose, and by any route of administration. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of oxycodone for treating pain in fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE for randomised controlled trials from inception to 25 July 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We planned to include randomised, double-blind trials of eight weeks' duration or longer, comparing oxycodone (alone or in fixed-dose combination with naloxone) with placebo or another active treatment. We did not include observational studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The plan was for two independent review authors to extract data and assess trial quality and potential bias. Where pooled analysis was possible, we planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. MAIN RESULTS No study satisfied the inclusion criteria. Effects of interventions were not assessed as there were no included studies. We have only very low quality evidence and are very uncertain about estimates of benefit and harm. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is no randomised trial evidence to support or refute the suggestion that oxycodone, alone or in combination with naloxone, reduces pain in fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen Gaskell
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)OxfordOxfordshireUK
| | - R Andrew Moore
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)OxfordOxfordshireUK
| | - Sheena Derry
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)OxfordOxfordshireUK
| | - Cathy Stannard
- Frenchay HospitalPain Clinic, Macmillan CentreBristolUKBS16 1LE
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue affecting approximately 2% of the general population. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Cannabis has been used for millennia to reduce pain and other somatic and psychological symptoms. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of cannabinoids for fibromyalgia symptoms in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE to April 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, three clinical trial registries, and contact with trial authors. SELECTION CRITERIA We selected randomised controlled trials of at least four weeks' duration of any formulation of cannabis products used for the treatment of adults with fibromyalgia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence was derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for drop-outs; at least 200 participants in the comparison, eight to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design), second tier evidence from data that did not meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers (i.e. data from at least 200 participants) in the comparison, and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that were considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). MAIN RESULTS We included two studies with 72 participants. Overall, the two studies were at moderate risk of bias. The evidence was derived from group mean data and completer analysis (very low quality evidence overall). We rated the quality of all outcomes according to GRADE as very low due to indirectness, imprecision and potential reporting bias.The primary outcomes in our review were participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) much or very much improved, withdrawal due to adverse events (tolerability) and serious adverse events (safety). Nabilone was compared to placebo and to amitriptyline in one study each. Study sizes were 32 and 40 participants. One study used a cross-over design and one used a parallel group design; study duration was four or six weeks. Both studies used nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, with a bedtime dosage of 1 mg/day. No study reported the proportion of participants experiencing at least 30% or 50% pain relief or who were very much improved. No study provided first or second tier (high to moderate quality) evidence for an outcome of efficacy, tolerability and safety. Third tier (very low quality) evidence indicated greater reduction of pain and limitations of HRQoL compared to placebo in one study. There were no significant differences to placebo noted for fatigue and depression (very low quality evidence). Third tier evidence indicated better effects of nabilone on sleep than amitriptyline (very low quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the two drugs noted for pain, mood and HRQoL (very low quality evidence). More participants dropped out due to adverse events in the nabilone groups (4/52 participants) than in the control groups (1/20 in placebo and 0/32 in amitriptyline group). The most frequent adverse events were dizziness, nausea, dry mouth and drowsiness (six participants with nabilone). Neither study reported serious adverse events during the period of both studies. We planned to create a GRADE 'Summary of findings' table, but due to the scarcity of data we were unable to do this. We found no relevant study with herbal cannabis, plant-based cannabinoids or synthetic cannabinoids other than nabilone in fibromyalgia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found no convincing, unbiased, high quality evidence suggesting that nabilone is of value in treating people with fibromyalgia. The tolerability of nabilone was low in people with fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian Walitt
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA, 20892
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue. It affects approximately 2% of the general population. Up to 70% of patients with fibromyalgia meet the criteria for a depressive or anxiety disorder. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life. Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving health-related quality of life. Antipsychotics might reduce fibromyalgia and associated mental health symptoms. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of antipsychotics in fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL (2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE and EMBASE to 20 May 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews and two clinical trial registries. We also contacted trial authors. SELECTION CRITERIA We selected controlled trials of at least four weeks duration of any formulation of antipsychotics used for the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted the data from all included studies and two review authors independently assessed study risks of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. We derived first tier evidence from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for drop-outs, at least 200 participants in the comparison, eight to 12 weeks duration, parallel design), second tier evidence from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and that we considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison, and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that we considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both. We rated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS We included a total of four studies with 296 participants.Three studies with 206 participants compared quetiapine, an atypical (second-generation) antipsychotic, with placebo. One study used a cross-over design and two studies a parallel-group design. Study duration was eight or 12 weeks. Quetiapine was used in all studies with a bedtime dosage between 50 and 300 mg/day. All studies had one or more sources of potential major bias and we judged them to be at moderate risk of bias overall. The primary outcomes in this review were participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) much or very much improved, withdrawal due to adverse events (tolerability) and serious adverse events (safety).Second tier evidence indicated that quetiapine was not statistically superior to placebo in the number of participants with a 50% or more pain reduction (very low quality evidence). No study reported data on PGIC. A greater proportion of participants on quetiapine reported a 30% or more pain reduction (risk difference (RD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.23; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 8, 95% CI 5 to 100) (very low quality evidence). A greater proportion of participants on quetiapine reported a clinically relevant improvement of health-related quality of life compared to placebo ( RD 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.31; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3 to 20) (very low quality evidence). Quetiapine was statistically superior to placebo in reducing sleep problems (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.67, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.23), depression (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.04) and anxiety (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.11) (very low quality evidence). Quetiapine was statistically superior to placebo in reducing the risk of withdrawing from the study due to a lack of efficacy (RD -0.14, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.05) (very low quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference between quetiapine and placebo in the proportion of participants withdrawing due to adverse events (tolerability) (very low quality evidence), in the frequency of serious adverse events (safety) (very low quality evidence) and in the proportion of participants reporting dizziness and somnolence as an adverse event (very low quality evidence). In more participants in the quetiapine group a substantial weight gain was noted (RD 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.15; number needed to treat for an additional harm (NNTH) 12, 95% CI 6 to 50) (very low quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels to a very low quality rating because of limitations of study design, indirectness (patients with major medical diseases and mental disorders were excluded) and imprecision (fewer than 400 patients were analysed).One parallel design study with 90 participants compared quetiapine (50 to 300 mg/day flexible at bedtime) to amitriptyline (10 to 75 mg/day flexible at bedtime). The study had three major risks of bias and we judged it to be at moderate risk of bias overall. We downgraded the quality of evidence by two levels to a low quality rating because of indirectness (patients with major medical diseases and mental disorders were excluded) and imprecision (fewer than 400 patients were analysed). Third tier evidence indicated no statistically significant differences between the two drugs. Both drugs did not statistically significantly differ in the reduction of average scores for pain, fatigue, sleep problems, depression, anxiety and for limitations of health-related quality of life and in the proportion of participants reporting dizziness, somnolence and weight gain as a side effect (low quality evidence). Compared to amitriptyline, more participants left the study due to adverse events (low quality evidence). No serious adverse events were reported (low quality evidence).We found no relevant study with other antipsychotics than quetiapine in fibromyalgia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Very low quality evidence suggests that quetiapine may be considered for a time-limited trial (4 to 12 weeks) to reduce pain, sleep problems, depression and anxiety in fibromyalgia patients with major depression. Potential side effects such as weight gain should be balanced against the potential benefits in shared decision making with the patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian Walitt
- National Institutes of HealthNational Center for Complementary and Integrative Health10 Center DriveBethesdaMDUSA20892
- National Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Nursing Research10 Center DriveBethesdaMDUSA20892
| | - Petra Klose
- University of Duisburg‐EssenDepartment of Internal and Integrative Medicine, Kliniken Essen‐Mitte, Faculty of MedicineAm Deimelsberg 34 aEssenGermanyD‐45276
| | - Nurcan Üçeyler
- University of WürzburgDepartment of NeurologyWürzburgGermany97080
| | - Tudor Phillips
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Churchill HospitalOxfordUKOX3 7LJ
| | - Winfried Häuser
- Technische Universität MünchenDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and PsychotherapyLangerstr. 3MünchenGermanyD‐81675
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Gracely RH, Schweinhardt P. Programmed symptoms: disparate effects united by purpose. Curr Rheumatol Rev 2016; 11:116-30. [PMID: 26088212 PMCID: PMC4997946 DOI: 10.2174/1573397111666150619095125] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2015] [Revised: 06/14/2015] [Accepted: 06/17/2015] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
Central sensitivity syndromes (CSS) share features of similar multiple symptoms, virtually unknown mechanisms and lack of effective treatments. The CSS nomenclature was chosen over alternatives because it focused on a putative physiological mechanism of central sensitization common to disorders such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, vulvodynia and temporomandibular disorder. Increasing evidence from multiple biological systems suggests a further development. In this new model central sensitization is part of a ensemble that includes also the symptoms of widespread pain, fatigue, unrefreshing sleep and dyscognition. The main feature is an intrinsic program that produces this ensemble to guide behavior to restore normal function in conditions that threaten survival. The well known “illness response” is a classic example that is triggered in response to the specific threat of viral infection. The major leap for this model in the context of CSS is that the symptom complex is not a reactive result of pathology, but a purposeful feeling state enlisted to combat pathology. Once triggered, this state is produced by potential mechanisms that likely include contributions of the peripheral and central immune systems, as well as stress response systems such as the autonomic system and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis. These act in concert to alter behavior in a beneficial direction. This concept explains similar symptoms for many triggering conditions, the poorly understood pathology, and the resistance to treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard H Gracely
- Center for Pain Research and Innovation, Koury Oral Health Sciences, CB #7455, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Wade KF, Lee DM, McBeth J, Ravindrarajah R, Gielen E, Pye SR, Vanderschueren D, Pendleton N, Finn JD, Bartfai G, Casanueva FF, Forti G, Giwercman A, Huhtaniemi IT, Kula K, Punab M, Wu FCW, O'Neill TW. Chronic widespread pain is associated with worsening frailty in European men. Age Ageing 2016; 45:268-74. [PMID: 26679698 PMCID: PMC4776622 DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afv170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2015] [Accepted: 09/23/2015] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: we hypothesised that chronic widespread pain (CWP), by acting as a potential stressor, may predispose to the development of, or worsening, frailty. Setting: longitudinal analysis within the European Male Ageing Study (EMAS). Participants: a total of 2,736 community-dwelling men aged 40–79. Methods: subjects completed a pain questionnaire and shaded a manikin, with the presence of CWP defined using the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption and depression were measured. Repeat assessments took place a median of 4.3 years later. A frailty index (FI) was used, with frail defined as an FI >0.35. The association between CWP at baseline and the new occurrence of frailty was examined using logistic regression; the association between CWP at baseline and change in FI was examined using negative binomial regression. Results: at baseline, 218 (8.3%) men reported CWP. Of the 2,631 men who were defined as non-frail at baseline, 112 (4.3%) were frail at follow-up; their mean FI was 0.12 (SD 0.1) at baseline and 0.15 (SD 0.1) at follow-up, with a mean change of 0.03 (SD 0.08) P ≤ 0.001. Among men who were non-frail at baseline, those with CWP were significantly more likely to develop frailty. After adjustment for age and centre, compared with those with no pain, those with CWP at baseline had a 70% higher FI at follow-up; these associations remained significant after further adjustment for smoking, body mass index, depression, physical activity and FI at baseline. Conclusion: the presence of CWP is associated with an increased risk of frailty in older European men.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Fredrika Wade
- Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK NIHR Manchester Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust-Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - David M Lee
- Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - John McBeth
- Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Rathi Ravindrarajah
- Manchester Royal Infirmary, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Evelien Gielen
- Geriatric Medicine Department, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Stephen R Pye
- Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Dirk Vanderschueren
- Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Endocrinology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Neil Pendleton
- Institute of Brain, Behaviour and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Salford, UK
| | - Joseph D Finn
- Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - György Bartfai
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Andrology, Albert Szent-György Medical University, Szeged, Hungary
| | - Felipe F Casanueva
- Department of Medicine, Santiago de Compostela University, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Gianni Forti
- Department of Experimental Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | | | - Ilpo T Huhtaniemi
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Krzysztof Kula
- Department of Andrology and Reproductive Endocrinology, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
| | - Margus Punab
- Andrology Unit, United Laboratories of Tartu University Clinics, Tartu, Estonia
| | - Frederick C W Wu
- Manchester Royal Infirmary, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK Andrology Research Unit, Developmental and Regenerative Biomedicine Research Group, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (MAHSC), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Terence W O'Neill
- Arthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK NIHR Manchester Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust-Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Puroila A, Paananen M, Taimela S, Järvelin MR, Karppinen J. Lifestyle-Factors in Adolescence as Predictors of Number of Musculoskeletal Pain Sites in Adulthood: A 17-Year Follow-Up Study of a Birth Cohort. PAIN MEDICINE 2015; 16:1177-85. [DOI: 10.1111/pme.12697] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
21
|
Häuser W, Hoffmann EM, Wolfe F, Worthing AB, Stahl N, Rothenberg R, Walitt B. Self-reported childhood maltreatment, lifelong traumatic events and mental disorders in fibromyalgia syndrome: a comparison of US and German outpatients. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2015; 33:S86-S92. [PMID: 25786049 PMCID: PMC4750383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2014] [Accepted: 02/17/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The robustness of findings on retrospective self-reports of childhood maltreatment and lifetime traumatic experiences of adults with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) has not been demonstrated by transcultural studies. This is the first transcultural study to focus on the associations between FMS, childhood maltreatment, lifetime psychological traumas, and potential differences between countries adjusting for psychological distress. METHODS 71 age-and sex-matched US and German FMS outpatients were compared. Childhood maltreatment were assessed by the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire and potential, traumatic experiences by the trauma list of the Munich Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Potential posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV-TR symptom criteria by the Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale. Potential depressive and anxiety disorder were assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ 4. RESULTS US and German patients did not significantly differ in the amount of self-reported childhood maltreatment (emotional, physical and sexual abuse or neglect) or in the frequency of lifetime traumatic experiences. No differences in the frequency of potential anxiety, depression, and PTSD were seen. Psychological distress fully accounted for group differences in emotional and sexual abuse and emotional and physical neglect. CONCLUSIONS The study demonstrated the transcultural robustness of findings on the association of adult FMS with self-reports of childhood maltreatment and lifelong traumatic experiences. These associations are mainly explained by current psychological distress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Winfried Häuser
- Department Internal Medicine I, Klinikum Saarbrücken, Saarbrücken, Germany
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Technische Universität München, München, Germany
| | - Eva-Maria Hoffmann
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Technische Universität München, München, Germany
| | - Frederick Wolfe
- National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases and University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, KS, USA
| | | | - Neil Stahl
- Arthritis and Rheumatism Associates Group Practice, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Brian Walitt
- MedStar Health Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA
- National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. Patients often report high disability levels and negative mood. Psychotherapies focus on reducing key symptoms, improving daily functioning, mood and sense of personal control over pain. OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of cognitive behavioural therapies (CBTs) for treating FM at end of treatment and at long-term (at least six months) follow-up. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 August 2013), PsycINFO (1966 to 28 August 2013) and SCOPUS (1980 to 28 August 2013). We searched http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (web site of the US National Institutes of Health) and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) for ongoing trials (last search 28 August,2013), and the reference lists of reviewed articles. SELECTION CRITERIA We selected randomised controlled trials of CBTs with children, adolescents and adults diagnosed with FM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The data of all included studies were extracted and the risks of bias of the studies were assessed independently by two review authors. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS Twenty-three studies with 24 study arms with CBTs were included. A total of 2031 patients were included; 1073 patients in CBT groups and 958 patients in control groups. Only two studies were without any risk of bias. The GRADE quality of evidence of the studies was low. CBTs were superior to controls in reducing pain at end of treatment by 0.5 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (standardised mean difference (SMD) - 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.49 to -0.17) and by 0.6 points at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) (SMD -0.40; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.17); in reducing negative mood at end of treatment by 0.7 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (SMD - 0.33; 95% CI -0.49 to -0.17) and by 1.3 points at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) (SMD -0.43; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.11); and in reducing disability at end of treatment by 0.7 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (SMD - 0.30; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.08) and at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) by 1.2 points (SMD -0.52; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.18). There was no statistically significant difference in dropout rates for any reasons between CBTs and controls (risk ratio (RR) 0.94; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS CBTs provided a small incremental benefit over control interventions in reducing pain, negative mood and disability at the end of treatment and at long-term follow-up. The dropout rates due to any reason did not differ between CBTs and controls.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathrin Bernardy
- BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil GmbH, Ruhr University BochumDepartment of Pain MedicineCample‐de‐la Bürk Platz 1BochumGermany44789
| | - Petra Klose
- University of Duisburg‐EssenDepartment of Internal and Integrative Medicine, Kliniken Essen‐Mitte, Faculty of MedicineAm Deimelsberg 34 aEssenGermanyD‐45276
| | - Angela J Busch
- University of SaskatchewanSchool of Physical Therapy104 Clinic PlaceSaskatoonSKCanadaS7N 2Z4
| | - Ernest HS Choy
- Cardiff University School of MedicineSection of Rheumatology, Division of Infection and ImmunityTenovus BuildingHeath ParkCardiffUKCF14 4XN
| | - Winfried Häuser
- Technische Universität MünchenDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and PsychotherapyLangerstr. 3MünchenGermanyD‐81675
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
|
24
|
Bernardy K, Klose P, Busch AJ, Choy EHS, Häuser W. Cognitive behavioural therapies for fibromyalgia syndrome. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2012. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009796] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
25
|
Fibromyalgia: mechanisms and potential impact of the ACR 2010 classification criteria. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2012; 8:108-16. [DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2011.216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
|