The effect of oxcarbazepine in peripheral neuropathic pain depends on pain phenotype: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phenotype-stratified study

Explorative sensory profile evaluation in central neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury

BACKGROUND

Sensory profiling in neuropathic pain using quantitative sensory testing (QST) has not been extended to central neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury (SCI). This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating sensory profiles in patients with neuropathic SCI pain.

METHOD

We retrospectively analysed consecutive QST data from 62 patients with neuropathic spinal cord injury pain (SCIP), following the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain protocol. The study included at-level and below-level SCIP due to a spinal cord lesion, and at-level SCIP following a cauda equina lesion. QST parameters were compared between diagnostic groups. QST profiles of below-level SCIP (central neuropathic pain) were manually assigned to sensory phenotypes based on literature and expert opinion.

RESULTS

No statistical difference in QST parameters between pain diagnoses was found. For central neuropathic pain (below-level SCIP), three phenotypes were descriptively observed: loss of function (59%), thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia combination (16%), and mechanical hyperalgesia (19%). The remaining 5% of patients did not fit a common pattern. There was no statistical difference in clinical and psychological variables between phenotypes. In a subgroup analysis, the loss of function phenotype weakly correlated with older age, longer time since injury, and longer pain duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we capture sensory phenotypes of central neuropathic pain following SCI. The limited sample size, high rate of missing values, and the retrospective nature of the study mean that results should be seen as strictly exploratory. Further research should replicate these findings and explore the significance of phenotypes.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

The evaluation of sensory phenotypes by quantitative sensory testing in central neuropathic pain due to SCI adds a new perspective on sensory phenotypes in comparison to peripheral neuropathic pain. The described thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia combination might represent involvement of the spinothalamic tract. In addition, there was a trend towards older age and longer time since injury in patients with loss of function.

Idiopathic Distal Sensory Polyneuropathy and Fibromyalgia Syndrome: A Comparative Phenotyping Study

INTRODUCTION

Painful idiopathic distal sensory polyneuropathy (IDSP) and fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) are cryptogenic chronic pain syndromes. The contribution of small fibre pathology (SFP) in FMS remains controversial. This study aims to quantify small nerve pathology in participants with IDSP and FMS and identify relationships of SFP with sensory phenotypes.

METHODS

In this study, 73 individuals (FMS: 25, IDSP: 23, healthy volunteers: 25) underwent comprehensive assessment, including neurological exams, questionnaires, sensory tests, and corneal confocal microscopy.

RESULTS

IDSP participants displayed lower wind-up ratio (WUR) relative to FMS (p < 0.001), loss of function to thermal and mechanical stimuli and elevated neuropathy disability scores compared to FMS and healthy volunteers (all p < 0.001). FMS participants demonstrated gain of function to heat and blunt pressure pain responses relative to IDSP, and healthy volunteers (heat: p = 0.002 and p = 0.003; pressure: both p < 0.001) and WUR (both p < 0.001). FMS participants exhibited reduced corneal nerve fibre density (p = 0.02), while IDSP participants had lower global corneal nerve measures (density, branch density, and length) relative to healthy volunteers (all p < 0.001). Utilising corneal nerve fibre length, SFP was demonstrated in 66.6% of participants (FMS: 13/25; IDSP: 22/23).

CONCLUSION

Participants with SFP, in both FMS and IDSP, reported symptoms indicative of small nerve fibre disease. Although distinctions in pain distributions are evident between individuals with FMS and IDSP, over 50% of participants between the two conditions displayed both a loss and gain of thermal and mechanical function suggestive of shared mechanisms. However, sensory phenotypes were associated with the presence of SFP in IDSP but not in FMS.

A Meta-analysis Exploring the Efficacy of Neuropathic Pain Medication for Low Back Pain or Spine-Related Leg Pain: Is Efficacy Dependent on the Presence of Neuropathic Pain?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Highly variable pain mechanisms in people with low back pain or spine-related leg pain might contribute to inefficacy of neuropathic pain medication. This meta-analysis aimed to determine how neuropathic pain is identified in clinical trials for people taking neuropathic pain medication for low back pain or spine-related leg pain and whether subgrouping based on the presence of neuropathic pain influences efficacy.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, CINAHL [EBSCO], APA PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry were searched from inception to 14 May, 2024. Randomized and crossover trials comparing first-line neuropathic pain medication for people with low back pain or spine-related leg pain to placebo or usual care were included. Two independent authors extracted data. Random-effects meta-analyses of all studies combined, and pre-planned subgroup meta-analyses based on the certainty of neuropathic pain (according to the neuropathic pain Special Interest Group [NeuPSIG] neuropathic pain grading criteria) were completed. Certainty of evidence was judged using the grading of recommendations assessment development and evaluation [GRADE] framework.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven included studies reported on 3619 participants. Overall, 33% of studies were judged unlikely to include people with neuropathic pain, 26% remained unclear. Only 41% identified people with possible, probable, or definite neuropathic pain. For pain, general analyses revealed only small effects at short term (mean difference [MD] - 9.30 [95% confidence interval [CI] - 13.71, - 4.88], I2 = 87%) and medium term (MD - 5.49 [95% CI - 7.24, - 3.74], I2 = 0%). Subgrouping at short term revealed studies including people with definite or probable neuropathic pain showed larger effects on pain (definite; MD - 16.65 [95% CI - 35.95, 2.65], I2 = 84%; probable; MD - 10.45 [95% CI - 14.79, - 6.12], I2 = 20%) than studies including people with possible (MD - 5.50 [95% CI - 20.52, 9.52], I2 = 78%), unlikely (MD - 6.67 [95% CI - 10.58, 2.76], I2 = 0%), or unclear neuropathic pain (MD - 8.93 [95% CI - 20.57, 2.71], I2 = 96%). Similarly, general analyses revealed negligible effects on disability at short term (MD - 3.35 [95% CI - 9.00, 2.29], I2 = 93%) and medium term (MD - 4.06 [95% CI - 5.63, - 2.48], I2 = 0%). Sub-grouping at short term revealed larger effects in studies including people with definite/probable neuropathic pain (MD - 9.25 [95% CI - 12.59, - 5.90], I2 = 2%) compared with those with possible/unclear/unlikely neuropathic pain (MD -1.57 [95% CI - 8.96, 5.82] I2 = 95%). Medium-term outcomes showed a similar trend, but were limited by low numbers of studies. Certainty of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies using neuropathic pain medication for low back pain or spine-related leg pain fail to adequately consider the presence of neuropathic pain. Meta-analyses suggest neuropathic pain medication may be most effective in people with low back pain or spine-related leg pain with a definite/probable neuropathic pain component. However, the low to very low certainty of evidence and poor identification of neuropathic pain in most studies prevent firm recommendations.

Understanding neuropathic pain: the role of neurophysiological tests in unveiling underlying mechanisms

Neuropathic pain, arising from lesions of the somatosensory nervous system, presents with diverse symptoms including ongoing pain, paroxysmal pain, and provoked pain, usually accompanied by sensory deficits. Understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms behind these symptoms is crucial for targeted treatment strategies. Neurophysiological techniques such as nerve conduction studies, reflexes, and evoked potentials help elucidate these mechanisms by assessing large myelinated non-nociceptive fibres and small nociceptive fibres. This argumentative review highlights the importance of tailored neurophysiological assessments for improving our understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms behind neuropathic pain symptoms.

Clinical pharmacology of neuropathic pain

This chapter aims to review the current pharmacological options for neuropathic pain treatment, their mechanisms of action, and future directions for clinical practice. Achieving pain relief in neuropathic pain conditions remains a challenge in clinical practice. The field of pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain has encountered significant difficulties in translating substantial advances in our understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms into clinically effective therapies. This chapter presents the drugs recommended for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain, based on the widely accepted treatment guidelines formulated by the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain. In addition to discussing how the evidence base is created as part of international consortia, the drugs are also examined in terms of their putative molecular mechanisms as well as pharmacological pleiotropy, i.e., their potential unspecific and multi-target effects resulting in modulation of neuronal hyperexcitability. The chapter closes with a discussion of potential future developments in the field.

Improving neuropathic pain treatment - by rigorous stratification from bench to bedside

Chronic pain is a constantly recurring and persistent illness, presenting a formidable healthcare challenge for patients and physicians alike. Current first-line analgesics offer only low-modest efficacy when averaged across populations, further contributing to this debilitating disease burden. Moreover, many recent trials for novel analgesics have not met primary efficacy endpoints, which is particularly striking considering the pharmacological advances have provided a range of highly relevant new drug targets. Heterogeneity within chronic pain cohorts is increasingly understood to play a critical role in these failures of treatment and drug discovery, with some patients deriving substantial benefits from a given intervention while it has little-to-no effect on others. As such, current treatment failures may not result from a true lack of efficacy, but rather a failure to target individuals whose pain is driven by mechanisms which it therapeutically modulates. This necessitates a move towards phenotypical stratification of patients to delineate responders and non-responders in a mechanistically driven manner. In this article, we outline a bench-to-bedside roadmap for this transition to mechanistically informed personalised pain medicine. We emphasise how the successful identification of novel analgesics is dependent on rigorous experimental design as well as the validity of models and translatability of outcome measures between the animal model and patients. Subsequently, we discuss general and specific aspects of human trial design to address heterogeneity in patient populations to increase the chance of identifying effective analgesics. Finally, we show how stratification approaches can be brought into clinical routine to the benefit of patients.

Genetic associations of neuropathic pain and sensory profile in a deeply phenotyped neuropathy cohort

ABSTRACT

We aimed to investigate the genetic associations of neuropathic pain in a deeply phenotyped cohort. Participants with neuropathic pain were cases and compared with those exposed to injury or disease but without neuropathic pain as control subjects. Diabetic polyneuropathy was the most common aetiology of neuropathic pain. A standardised quantitative sensory testing protocol was used to categorize participants based on sensory profile. We performed genome-wide association study, and in a subset of participants, we undertook whole-exome sequencing targeting analyses of 45 known pain-related genes. In the genome-wide association study of diabetic neuropathy (N = 1541), a top significant association was found at the KCNT2 locus linked with pain intensity (rs114159097, P = 3.55 × 10-8). Gene-based analysis revealed significant associations between LHX8 and TCF7L2 and neuropathic pain. Polygenic risk score for depression was associated with neuropathic pain in all participants. Polygenic risk score for C-reactive protein showed a positive association, while that for fasting insulin showed a negative association with neuropathic pain, in individuals with diabetic polyneuropathy. Gene burden analysis of candidate pain genes supported significant associations between rare variants in SCN9A and OPRM1 and neuropathic pain. Comparison of individuals with the "irritable" nociceptor profile to those with a "nonirritable" nociceptor profile identified a significantly associated variant (rs72669682, P = 4.39 × 10-8) within the ANK2 gene. Our study on a deeply phenotyped cohort with neuropathic pain has confirmed genetic associations with the known pain-related genes KCNT2, OPRM1, and SCN9A and identified novel associations with LHX8 and ANK2, genes not previously linked to pain and sensory profiles, respectively.

Discordance between preclinical and clinical testing of NaV1.7-selective inhibitors for pain

ABSTRACT

The voltage-gated sodium channel NaV1.7 plays an important role in pain processing according to genetic data. Those data made NaV1.7 a popular drug target, especially since its relatively selective expression in nociceptors promised pain relief without the adverse effects associated with broader sodium channel blockade. Despite encouraging preclinical data in rodents, NaV1.7-selective inhibitors have not yet proven effective in clinical trials. Discrepancies between preclinical and clinical results should raise alarms. We reviewed preclinical and clinical reports on the analgesic efficacy of NaV1.7-selective inhibitors and found critical differences in several factors. Putting aside species differences, most preclinical studies tested young male rodents with limited genetic variability, inconsistent with the clinical population. Inflammatory pain was the most common preclinical chronic pain model whereas nearly all clinical trials focused on neuropathic pain despite some evidence suggesting NaV1.7 channels are not essential for neuropathic pain. Preclinical studies almost exclusively measured evoked pain whereas most clinical trials assessed average pain intensity without distinguishing between evoked and spontaneous pain. Nearly all preclinical studies gave a single dose of drug unlike the repeat dosing used clinically, thus precluding preclinical data from demonstrating whether tolerance or other slow processes occur. In summary, preclinical testing of NaV1.7-selective inhibitors aligned poorly with clinical testing. Beyond issues that have already garnered widespread attention in the pain literature, our results highlight the treatment regimen and choice of pain model as areas for improvement.

Lacosamide in palliative medicine: a retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of oral (PO) and subcutaneous (SC) lacosamide for refractory symptoms in the palliative setting.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of the use of lacosamide since it was introduced in our palliative care service 1½ years ago. All clinical notes, medication administration records and infusion monitoring documentation were examined to ascertain therapeutic aim, efficacy, and tolerability.

RESULTS

Lacosamide was administered to 91 patients; 90% had cancer. The most common indication was neuropathic pain (97%); there appeared to be a significant improvement in 35%; this was sometimes apparent within a few hours of an SC loading 'test' dose. Many recipients (44%) were in their last month of life. 59% received one or more SC doses; switching from PO to SC lacosamide was straightforward and it appeared compatible with a range of other palliative medications. Lacosamide appeared well tolerated; adverse effects were identified in 11% (10/91), half of whom (5%, 5/91) discontinued treatment. Of 59 admixtures infused SC, one mild SC site reaction occurred that resolved with the addition of dexamethasone.

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide appears to be a promising option for refractory symptoms warranting further study; SC administration is an advantage when the PO route is lost.

Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Emerging Treatments of Neuropathic Pain and Novel Diagnostic Methods

BACKGROUND

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a prevalent and debilitating complication of diabetes, often leading to severe neuropathic pain. Although other diabetes-related complications have witnessed a surge of emerging treatments in recent years, DPN has seen minimal progression. This stagnation stems from various factors, including insensitive diagnostic methods and inadequate treatment options for neuropathic pain.

METHODS

In this comprehensive review, we highlight promising novel diagnostic techniques for assessing DPN, elucidating their development, strengths, and limitations, and assessing their potential as future reliable clinical biomarkers and endpoints. In addition, we delve into the most promising emerging pharmacological and mechanistic treatments for managing neuropathic pain, an area currently characterized by inadequate pain relief and a notable burden of side effects.

RESULTS

Skin biopsies, corneal confocal microscopy, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, blood-derived biomarkers, and multi-omics emerge as some of the most promising new techniques, while low-dose naltrexone, selective sodium-channel blockers, calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies, and angiotensin type 2 receptor antagonists emerge as some of the most promising new drug candidates.

CONCLUSION

Our review concludes that although several promising diagnostic modalities and emerging treatments exist, an ongoing need persists for the further development of sensitive diagnostic tools and mechanism-based, personalized treatment approaches.

Radiofrequency stimulation of the dorsal root ganglion as a diagnostic tool for radicular pain syndromes: six representative cases

BACKGROUND

We discuss the diagnostic benefit of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) in a case series of patients with different pathologies. We expand the diagnostic potential of DRG stimulation beyond paresthesia mapping by using DRG stimulation to help determine the role of the DRG in the patient's pain and narrow down the etiology. In some cases, DRG stimulation was also part of the treatment plan.

METHODS

Six patients underwent DRG radiofrequency as a diagnostic/therapeutic step before considering implantation of a DRG neurostimulator. First, patients underwent a basic bedside neurological evaluation. Next, an electrode was placed in the epidural space through the sacral hiatus or between vertebral laminae. Then, sensory stimulation was applied at 50 Hz and gradually increased from 0.1 V until the patient reported paresthesia or until a maximum intensity of 2 V was reached. Patients were asked to describe where the stimulation was felt and outline the anatomical area the paresthesia covered. Then a motor stimulation was applied at 2 Hz until muscle twitching was reported by the patient or observed by the physician.

RESULTS

The information obtained helped diagnose the type of lesion as principally preganglionic, ganglionic, or postganglionic. This information guided patient management.

CONCLUSION

PRF of the DRG can provide valuable diagnostic information and is a useful step before ganglionic electrode implantation. In all cases, PRF of the DRG provided valuable diagnostic information and guided management options.

Posterior insula repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for chronic pain in patients with Parkinson disease - pain type matters: A double-blinded randomized sham-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Altered somatosensory processing in the posterior insula may play a role in chronic pain development and contribute to Parkinson disease (PD)-related pain. Posterior-superior insula (PSI) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been demonstrated to have analgesic effects among patients with some chronic pain conditions. This study aimed at assessing the efficacy of PSI-rTMS for treating PD-related pain.

METHODS

This was a double-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled, parallel-arm trial (NCT03504748). People with PD (PwP)-related chronic pain underwent five daily PSI-rTMS sessions for a week, followed by once weekly maintenance stimulations for seven weeks. rTMS was delivered at 10 Hz and 80% of the resting motor threshold. The primary outcome was a ≥ 30% pain intensity reduction at 8 weeks compared to baseline. Functionality, mood, cognitive, motor status, and somatosensory thresholds were also assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Mean age was 55.2 ± 9.5 years-old, and 56% were female. Nociceptive pain accounted for 60%, and neuropathic and nociplastic for 20% each. No significant difference was found for 30% pain reduction response rates between active (42.7%) and sham groups (14.6%, p = 0.26). Secondary clinical outcomes and sensory thresholds also did not differ significantly. In a post hoc analysis, PwP with nociceptive pain sub-type experienced more pain relief after active (85.7%) compared to sham PSI-rTMS (25%, p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary results suggest that different types of PD-related pain may respond differently to treatment, and therefore people with PD may benefit from having PD-related pain well characterized in research trials and in clinical practice.

Prognosis of Pain After Stroke During Rehabilitation Depends on the Pain Quality

OBJECTIVE

Pain after a stroke interferes with daily life and the rehabilitation process. This study aimed to clarify the prognosis of pain in subgroups of patients with pain after a stroke using pain quality data.

METHODS

The study included 85 patients with pain after stroke undergoing exercise-based rehabilitation. Items of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) were used, and patients with pain after stroke were clustered according to their scores of NPSI. Other clinical assessments, such as physical and psychological conditions, were assessed by interviews and questionnaires, and then these were compared among subgroups in a cross-sectional analysis. Longitudinal pain intensity in each subgroup was recorded during 12 weeks after the stroke and the patients' pain prognoses were compared between subgroups.

RESULTS

Four distinct subgroups were clustered: cluster 1 (cold-evoked pain and tingling), cluster 2 (tingling only), cluster 3 (pressure-evoked pain), and cluster 4 (deep muscle pain with a squeezing and pressure sensation). The cross-sectional analysis showed varying clinical symptoms among the subgroups, with differences in the prevalence of joint pain, limited range of motion, somatosensory dysfunction, and allodynia. There were no significant differences in pain intensity at baseline among the subgroups. A longitudinal analysis showed divergent prognoses of pain intensity among the subgroups. The pain intensity in cluster 4 was significantly alleviated, which suggested that musculoskeletal pain could be reduced with conventional exercise-based rehabilitation. However, the pain intensity of patients in clusters 1 and 2 remained over 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The study classified patients into clinically meaningful subgroups using pain quality data and provided insight into their prognosis of pain. The findings could be useful for guiding personalized rehabilitation strategies for pain management.

IMPACT

Assessment of pain quality in patients with pain after stroke leads to personalized rehabilitation for pain management.

An improved conflict avoidance assay reveals modality-specific differences in pain hypersensitivity across sexes

ABSTRACT

Abnormal encoding of somatosensory modalities (ie, mechanical, cold, and heat) are a critical part of pathological pain states. Detailed phenotyping of patients' responses to these modalities have raised hopes that analgesic treatments could one day be tailored to a patient's phenotype. Such precise treatment would require a profound understanding of the underlying mechanisms of specific pain phenotypes at molecular, cellular, and circuitry levels. Although preclinical pain models have helped in that regard, the lack of a unified assay quantifying detailed mechanical, cold, and heat pain responses on the same scale precludes comparing how analgesic compounds act on different sensory phenotypes. The conflict avoidance assay is promising in that regard, but testing conditions require validation for its use with multiple modalities. In this study, we improve upon the conflict avoidance assay to provide a validated and detailed assessment of all 3 modalities within the same animal, in mice. We first optimized testing conditions to minimize the necessary amount of training and to reduce sex differences in performances. We then tested what range of stimuli produce dynamic stimulus-response relationships for different outcome measures in naive mice. We finally used this assay to show that nerve injury produces modality-specific sex differences in pain behavior. Our improved assay opens new avenues to study the basis of modality-specific abnormalities in pain behavior.

Cold-evoked potentials in Fabry disease and polyneuropathy

Background

Fabry disease (FD) causes cold-evoked pain and impaired cold perception through small fiber damage, which also occurs in polyneuropathies (PNP) of other origins. The integrity of thinly myelinated fibers and the spinothalamic tract is assessable by cold-evoked potentials (CEPs). In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical value of CEP by investigating its associations with pain, autonomic measures, sensory loss, and neuropathic signs.

Methods

CEPs were examined at the hand and foot dorsum of patients with FD (n = 16) and PNP (n = 21) and healthy controls (n = 23). Sensory phenotyping was performed using quantitative sensory testing (QST). The painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ), FabryScan, and measures for the autonomic nervous system were applied. Group comparisons and correlation analyses were performed.

Results

CEPs of 87.5% of the FD and 85.7% of the PNP patients were eligible for statistical analysis. In all patients combined, CEP data correlated significantly with cold detection loss, PDQ items, pain, and autonomic measures. Abnormal CEP latency in FD patients was associated with an abnormal heart frequency variability item (r = -0.684; adjusted p = 0.04). In PNP patients, CEP latency correlated significantly with PDQ items, and CEP amplitude correlated with autonomic measures (r = 0.688, adjusted p = 0.008; r = 0.619, adjusted p = 0.024). Furthermore, mechanical pain thresholds differed significantly between FD (gain range) and PNP patients (loss range) (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Abnormal CEPs were associated with current pain, neuropathic signs and symptoms, and an abnormal function of the autonomic nervous system. The latter has not been mirrored by QST parameters. Therefore, CEPs appear to deliver a wider spectrum of information on the sensory nervous system than QST alone.

4. Painful diabetic polyneuropathy

INTRODUCTION

Pain as a symptom of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) significantly lowers quality of life, increases mortality and is the main reason for patients with diabetes to seek medical attention. The number of people suffering from painful diabetic polyneuropathy (PDPN) has increased significantly over the past decades.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy was retrieved and summarized.

RESULTS

The etiology of PDPN is complex, with primary damage to peripheral nociceptors and altered spinal and supra-spinal modulation. To achieve better patient outcomes, the mode of diagnosis and treatment of PDPN evolves toward more precise pain-phenotyping and genotyping based on patient-specific characteristics, new diagnostic tools, and prior response to pharmacological treatments. According to the Toronto Diabetic Neuropathy Expert Group, a presumptive diagnosis of "probable PDPN" is sufficient to initiate treatment. Proper control of plasma glucose levels, and prevention of risk factors are essential in the treatment of PDPN. Mechanism-based pharmacological treatment should be initiated as early as possible. If symptomatic pharmacologic treatment fails, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered. In isolated cases, where symptomatic pharmacologic treatment and SCS are unsuccessful or cannot be used, sympathetic lumbar chain neurolysis and/or radiofrequency ablation (SLCN/SLCRF), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGs) or posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) may be considered. However, it is recommended that these treatments be applied only in a study setting in a center of expertise.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of PDPN evolves toward pheno-and genotyping and treatment should be mechanism-based.

The effect of lacosamide in peripheral neuropathic pain: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phenotype-stratified trial

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain is common and difficult to treat. The sodium channel blocker lacosamide is efficacious in animal models of pain, but its effect on neuropathic pain in humans is inconclusive.

METHODS

In a multicentre, randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled phenotype stratified trial, we examined if lacosamide produced better pain relief in patients with the irritable nociceptor phenotype compared to those without. The primary outcome was the change in daily average pain from baseline to last week of 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary and tertiary outcomes included pain relief, patient global impression of change and presence of 30% and 50% pain reduction.

RESULTS

The study was prematurely closed with 93 patients included and 63 randomized to lacosamide or placebo in a 2:1 ratio, of which 49 fulfilled the per protocol criteria and was used for the primary objective. We did not find a better effect of lacosamide in patients with the irritable nociceptor phenotype, the 95% CI for the primary objective was 0.41 (-1.2 to 2.0). For all patients randomized, lacosamide had no effect on the primary outcome, but significantly more patients were responders to lacosamide than during placebo, with an NNT of 4.0 (95% CI 2.3-16.1) and 5.0 (95% CI 2.8-24.5) for 30% and 50% pain reduction respectively. We did not identify any predictors for response. Lacosamide was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

We could not confirm that lacosamide was more efficacious in patients with the irritable nociceptor type, but the study was prematurely closed, so we cannot exclude a small difference.

SIGNIFICANCE

Treatment of neuropathic pain is often a trial and error process. Little is known about which patient benefit from which kind of medication. The sodium channel blocker lacosamide shows variable effect on neuropathic pain. Pain sensory phenotype, as defined by quantitative sensory testing, did not predict response to treatment with lacosamide.

Practical approaches to improving translatability and reproducibility in preclinical pain research

Pain research continues to face the challenge of poor translatability of pre-clinical studies. In this short primer, we are summarizing the possible causes, with an emphasis on practical and constructive solutions. In particular, we stress the importance of increased heterogeneity in animal studies; formal or informal pre-registration to combat publication bias; and increased statistical training in order to help pre-clinical scientists appreciate the usefulness of available experimental design and reporting guidelines.

Angiotensin II type 2 receptor signalling as a pain target: Bench, bedside and back-translation

Translating promising preclinical pain relief data for novel molecules from drug discovery to positive clinical trial outcomes is challenging. The angiotensin II type 2 (AT2) receptor is a clinically-validated target based upon positive proof-of-concept clinical trial data in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia. This trial was conducted because AT2 receptor antagonists evoked pain relief in rodent models of neuropathic pain. EMA401 was selected as the drug candidate based upon its suitable preclinical toxicity and safety profile and good pharmacokinetics. Herein, we provide an overview of the discovery, preclinical and clinical development of EMA401, for the alleviation of peripheral neuropathic pain.

Comprehensive quantitative sensory testing shows altered sensory function in women with chronic pelvic pain: results from the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) Study

ABSTRACT

Chronic pelvic pain (CPP), despite its high prevalence, is still relatively poorly understood mechanistically. This study, as part of the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) project, has used a full quantitative sensory testing (QST) paradigm to profile n = 85 women with and without CPP (endometriosis or bladder pain specifically). We used the foot as a control site and abdomen as the test site. Across 5 diagnostically determined subgroups, we found features which are common across different aetiologies, eg, gain of function in pressure pain threshold (PPT) when assessing responses from the lower abdomen or pelvis (referred pain site). However, disease-specific phenotypes were also identified, eg, greater mechanical allodynia in endometriosis, despite there being large heterogeneities within diagnostic groups. The most common QST sensory phenotype was mechanical hyperalgesia (>50% across all the groups). A "healthy' sensory phenotype was seen in <7% of CPP participants. Specific QST measures correlated with sensory symptoms assessed by the painDETECT questionnaire (pressure-evoked pain [painDETECT] and PPT [QST] [ r = 0.47, P < 0.001]; mechanical hyperalgesia (painDETECT) and mechanical pain sensitivity [MPS from QST] [ r = 0.38, P = 0.009]). The data suggest that participants with CPP are sensitive to both deep tissue and cutaneous inputs, suggesting that central mechanisms may be important in this cohort. We also see phenotypes such as thermal hyperalgesia, which may be the result of peripheral mechanisms, such as irritable nociceptors. This highlights the importance of stratifying patients into clinically meaningful phenotypes, which may have implications for the development of better therapeutic strategies for CPP.

Beyond biopsychosocial: The keystone mechanism theory of pain

Pain is a deeply personal experience, with interindividual differences in its chronification and treatment presenting a formidable healthcare challenge. The biopsychosocial model (BPSm) has been hugely influential within nascent attempts at precision pain medicine, steering the field away from a reductionist biomechanical viewpoint and emphasising complex interactions of biological, psychological, and social factors which shape the individuality of pain. However, despite offering a strong theoretical foundation and holistic perspective, we contend that the BPSm remains limited in its capacity to deliver truly mechanistically informed treatment of pain. We therefore propose the keystone model of pain which offers a pragmatic balance between the dimensionality expansive BPSm and overly reductive approaches, providing both theoretical and practical advantages for the transition from treating populations to individual people.

Personalized treatment of neuropathic pain: Where are we now?

BACKGROUND

The treatment of neuropathic pain remains a major unmet need that the development of personalized and refined treatment strategies may contribute to address.

DATABASE

In this narrative review, we summarize the various approaches based on objective biomarkers or clinical markers that could be used.

RESULTS

In principle, the validation of objective biomarkers would be the most robust approach. However, although promising results have been reported demonstrating a potential value of genomics, anatomical or functional markers, the clinical validation of these markers has only just begun. Thus, most of the strategies documented to date have been based on the development of clinical markers. In particular, many studies have suggested that the identification of specific subgroups of patients presenting with specific combinations of symptoms and signs would be a relevant approach. Two main approaches have been used to identify relevant sensory profiles: quantitative sensory testing and specific patients reported outcomes based on description of pain qualities.

CONCLUSION

We discuss here the advantages and limitations of these approaches, which are not mutually exclusive.

SIGNIFICANCE

Recent data indicate that various new treatment strategies based on predictive biological and/or clinical markers could be helpful to better personalized and therefore improve the management of neuropathic pain.

Profiling migraine patients according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics: a cluster analysis approach

AIM

This study aims to profile migraine patients according clinical and psychophysical characteristics.

METHOD

In this observational study, two cohorts of migraine patients(episodic/chronic) were included. Cohort-1: ictal/perictal phase; Cohort-2: interictal phase.The following variables were assessed: headache frequency; disability; cervical active range of motion(AROM) in flexion, extension, right/left lateral flexion, right/left rotation; pressure-pain threshold(PPT) over: temporalis, two cervical areas(C1/C4 vertebral segments), and two distal pain-free areas(hand/leg). Cluster analysis was performed using the K-means algorithm. Differences across clusters were investigated.

RESULTS

Cohort-1: 100 patients were included, and two clusters were identified. Cluster-1.1 (19%), Cluster-1.2 (81%). Cluster 1.1 had a higher percentage of men (P = .037) and higher disability (P = .003) compared to Clusters 1.2. Cluster 1.2 had reduced AROM in flexion, extension, and left/right lateral flexion (P < .037), and lower PPT value in all areas (P < .001) compared to Cluster 1.1. Cohort-2: 98 patients were included and three clusters were identified. Cluster-2.1(18%), Cluster-2.2(45%), and Cluster-2.3(37%). Cluster-2.1 had a higher percentage of men compared to clusters-2.2 and 2.3 (P = .009). Cluster-2.3 had higher headache frequency, and disability compared to Cluster-2.2 (P < .006), and higher disability compared to Cluster-2.1 (P = .010). Cluster-2.3 had reduced AROM in all directions compared to Clusters-2.1 and 2.2 (P < .029). Clusters-2.2 and 2.3 have lower PPT values in all areas compared to Cluster-1.1 (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In the Ictal/perictal phase, two clusters were identified according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics, with one group showing no psychophysical impairment and one with increased pain-sensitivity and cervical musculoskeletal-dysfunctions.In the interictal phase, three clusters could be identified, with one group showing no psychophysical impairment, one increased pain-sensitivity, and one increased pain sensitivity and cervical musculoskeletal-dysfunctions.

Diabetic neuropathy: Pathogenesis and evolving principles of management

The global rise of prediabetes and diabetes has spawned an epidemic of complications associated with these conditions. Neuropathy is the most common consequence, with distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) being the most prevalent. Diabetic neuropathy (DN) is a debilitating consequence of diabetes mellitus resulting in the highest morbidity and death, besides imposing a substantial financial burden on the patient. Loss of sensory function commencing distally in the lower limbs, accompanied by discomfort and considerable morbidity, characterizes diabetic neuropathy. The clinical evaluation and therapeutic options for diabetic peripheral neuropathy are multifaceted. At least fifty percent of people with diabetes acquire diabetic neuropathy over time. Good glycemic control halts the evolution in individuals with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. These results have prompted fresh attempts to comprehend the origin and develop new guidelines for prevention and treatment. New recommendations have also been established for the treatment of painful DN using separate classes of medications, with an emphasis on avoiding the use of opioids. Although our comprehension of the intricacies of diabetic neuropathy has progressed significantly over the past decade, the unique processes driving the neuropathy in type 1 and type 2 diabetes remain unexplained. Currently, glycemic control and pain management are the only effective therapies. While glucose management significantly reduces neuropathy development in type 1 diabetics, the effect is considerably lower in type 2 diabetics. Evidence supports the use of anticonvulsants and antidepressants for diabetic peripheral neuropathy pain treatment. However, the absence of disease-modifying medications for diabetic DSP necessitates the identification of unrecognized modifiable risk factors. It is imperative to identify the 'missed' risk factors and targets, allowing comprehensive, individualized care for patients.

Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In these guidelines, we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies providing information on the sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing, neurophysiology, skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy. We also analysed how functional neuroimaging, peripheral nerve blocks, and genetic testing might provide useful information in diagnosing NeP.

RESULTS

Of the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I-DN4 (self-administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, and S-LANSS (self-administered LANSS) and PainDETECT weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic pathway for patients with possible NeP. We devised a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials in the NeP diagnosis. Trigeminal reflex testing received a strong recommendation in diagnosing secondary trigeminal neuralgia. Although many studies support the usefulness of corneal confocal microscopy in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy, no study specifically investigated the diagnostic accuracy of this technique in patients with NeP. Functional neuroimaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in disclosing pathophysiology and/or predicting outcomes, but current literature does not support their use for diagnosing NeP. Genetic testing may be considered at specialist centres, in selected cases.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for NeP diagnosis. Due to the poor-to-moderate quality of evidence identified by this review, future large-scale, well-designed, multicentre studies assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests for NeP are needed.

Advances and challenges in neuropathic pain: a narrative review and future directions

Over the past few decades, substantial advances have been made in neuropathic pain clinical research. An updated definition and classification have been agreed. Validated questionnaires have improved the detection and assessment of acute and chronic neuropathic pain; and newer neuropathic pain syndromes associated with COVID-19 have been described. The management of neuropathic pain has moved from empirical to evidence-based medicine. However, appropriately targeting current medications and the successful clinical development of drugs acting on new targets remain challenging. Innovative approaches to improving therapeutic strategies are required. These mainly encompass rational combination therapy, drug repurposing, non-pharmacological approaches (such as neurostimulation techniques), and personalised therapeutic management. This narrative review reports historical and current perspectives regarding the definitions, classification, assessment, and management of neuropathic pain and explores potential avenues for future research.

From neurotransmitters to networks: Transcending organisational hierarchies with molecular-informed functional imaging

The human brain exhibits complex interactions across micro, meso-, and macro-scale organisational principles. Recent synergistic multi-modal approaches have begun to link micro-scale information to systems level dynamics, transcending organisational hierarchies and offering novel perspectives into the brain's function and dysfunction. Specifically, the distribution of micro-scale properties (such as receptor density or gene expression) can be mapped onto macro-scale measures from functional MRI to provide novel neurobiological insights. Methodological approaches to enrich functional imaging analyses with molecular information are rapidly evolving, with several streams of research having developed relatively independently, each offering unique potential to explore the trans-hierarchical functioning of the brain. Here, we address the three principal streams of research - spatial correlation, molecular-enriched network, and in-silico whole brain modelling analyses - to provide a critical overview of the different sources of molecular information, how this information can be utilised within analyses of fMRI data, the merits and pitfalls of each methodology, and, through the use of key examples, highlight their promise to shed new light on key domains of neuroscientific inquiry.

Botulinum toxin A and neuropathic pain: An update

Botulinum toxin type A is a widely used neurotoxin for the treatment of muscle hyperactivity such as dystonia and spasticity. Several clinical trials have also reported an efficacy of subcutaneous or intradermal administrations of botulinum toxin A on various neuropathic pain conditions including idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia and found that specific sensory phenotypes were predictors of the response. This narrative review summarizes the potential mechanisms of action, efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin A in neuropathic pain as well as its place in the therapeutic algorithm of neuropathic pain.

Neuropathic Pain and Spinal Cord Injury: Management, Phenotypes, and Biomarkers

Chronic neuropathic pain after a spinal cord injury (SCI) continues to be a complex condition that is difficult to manage due to multiple underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the association with psychosocial factors. Determining the individual contribution of each of these factors is currently not a realistic goal; however, focusing on the primary mechanisms may be more feasible. One approach used to uncover underlying mechanisms includes phenotyping using pain symptoms and somatosensory function. However, this approach does not consider cognitive and psychosocial mechanisms that may also significantly contribute to the pain experience and impact treatment outcomes. Indeed, clinical experience supports that a combination of self-management, non-pharmacological, and pharmacological approaches is needed to optimally manage pain in this population. This article will provide a broad updated summary integrating the clinical aspects of SCI-related neuropathic pain, potential pain mechanisms, evidence-based treatment recommendations, neuropathic pain phenotypes and brain biomarkers, psychosocial factors, and progress regarding how defining neuropathic pain phenotypes and other surrogate measures in the neuropathic pain field may lead to targeted treatments for neuropathic pain after SCI.

Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Practical Guidance and Challenges for Clinical Management

Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is present in nearly a quarter of people with diabetes. It is estimated to affect over 100 million people worldwide. PDPN is associated with impaired daily functioning, depression, sleep disturbance, financial instability, and a decreased quality of life. Despite its high prevalence and significant health burden, it remains an underdiagnosed and undertreated condition. PDPN is a complex pain phenomenon with the experience of pain associated with and exacerbated by poor sleep and low mood. A holistic approach to patient-centred care alongside the pharmacological therapy is required to maximise benefit. A key treatment challenge is managing patient expectation, as a good outcome from treatment is defined as a reduction in pain of 30-50%, with a complete pain-free outcome being rare. The future for the treatment of PDPN holds promise, despite a 20-year void in the licensing of new analgesic agents for neuropathic pain. There are over 50 new molecular entities reaching clinical development and several demonstrating benefit in early-stage clinical trials. We review the current approaches to its diagnosis, the tools, and questionnaires available to clinicians, international guidance on PDPN management, and existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options. We synthesise evidence and the guidance from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, American Academy of Neurology, American Diabetes Association, Diabetes Canada, German Diabetes Association, and the International Diabetes Federation into a practical guide to the treatment of PDPN and highlight the need for future research into mechanistic-based treatments in order to prioritise the development of personalised medicine.

Oral capsules of tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) and their combination in peripheral neuropathic pain treatment

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids are often prescribed for neuropathic pain, but the evidence-based recommendation is 'weak against'.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to examine the effect of two cannabinoids and their combination in peripheral neuropathic pain.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, trial with treatment arms for cannabidiol (CBD), tetra-hydro-cannabinol (THC), CBD and THC combination (CBD/THC), and placebo in a 1:1:1:1 ratio and flexible drug doses (CBD 5-50 mg, THC 2.5-25 mg, and CBD/THC 5 mg/2.5 mg-50 mg/25 mg). Treatment periods of 8-week duration were proceeded by 1 week for baseline observations. Patients with painful polyneuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia and peripheral nerve injury (traumatic or surgical) failing at least one previous evidence-based pharmacological treatment were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the change in weekly average of daily pain measured with a numeric rating scale (NRS). Trail Making Test (TMT) was used as one of the tests of mental functioning.

RESULTS

In all, 145 patients were included in the study of which 118 were randomized and 115 included in the intention-to-treat analysis. None of the treatments reduced pain compared to placebo (p = 0.04-0.60). Effect sizes as estimated in week 8 (positive values worse and negative better than placebo) were CBD mean 1.14 NRS points (95% CI 0.11-2.19), THC 0.38 (CI -0.65 to 1.4) and CBD/THC -0.12 (-1.13 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

CBD, THC and their combination did not relieve peripheral neuropathic pain in patients failing at least one previous evidence-based treatment for neuropathic pain.

Mirror peripheral neuropathy and unilateral chronic neuropathic pain: insights from asymmetric neurological patterns in leprosy

ABSTRACT

Leprosy-related multiple mononeuropathy offers a pattern of impairment where neuropathy with and without neuropathic pain (NeP) are present in the same individual, thus allowing to investigate peripheral sensory and innervation in both conditions. This cross-sectional study collected data on clinical and neurological examination, pain assessment questionnaires, quantitative sensory test, and intraepidermal nerve fiber density of patients with leprosy and divided the cohort into 2 groups: with NeP (P+) and without NeP (P-). Furthermore, we assessed mirror body areas in the same NeP individuals with bilateral neuropathy also presenting unilateral NeP. Pain-free patients having unilateral neuropathy were controls. A total of 37 P+ and 22 P- patients were evaluated. Limb areas with NeP had signs of C-fiber dysfunction and hyperesthesia on quantitative sensory testing compared with limb areas having neuropathy without NeP. Skin denervation was found in all patients with leprosy. Comparisons of limbs with and without neuropathy and with and without NeP revealed that higher heat pain thresholds (HPTs) were associated with neuropathic pain areas, whereas less altered HPT was correlated with higher fiber density. Furthermore, a relationship was found between time of leprosy treatment termination and more intense neuropathy, expressed by HPT increasing 0.03°C each month. As expected, interindividual comparisons failed to show differences in intraepidermal nerve fiber density and subepidermal plexus areas between P+ and P- patients ( P = 0.2980, P = 0.9044; respectively). Higher HPT and lower mechanical detection threshold were related to NeP. This study pointed out the relevance of intraindividual comparisons including mirror areas when assessing local changes in peripheral NeP.

Site matters: Central neuropathic pain characteristics and somatosensory findings after brain and spinal cord lesions

BACKGROUND

It is unknown if different etiologies or lesion topographies influence central neuropathic pain (CNP) clinical manifestation.

METHODS

We explored the symptom-somatosensory profile relationships in CNP patients with different types of lesions to the central nervous system to gain insight into CNP mechanisms. We compared the CNP profile through pain descriptors, standardized bedside examination, and quantitative sensory test in two different etiologies with segregated lesion locations: the brain, central poststroke pain (CPSP, n = 39), and the spinal cord central pain due to spinal cord injury (CPSCI, n = 40) in neuromyelitis optica.

RESULTS

Results are expressed as median (25th to 75th percentiles). CPSP presented higher evoked and paroxysmal pain scores compared to CPSCI (p < 0.001), and lower cold thermal limen (5.6°C [0.0-12.9]) compared to CPSCI (20.0°C [4.2-22.9]; p = 0.004). CPSCI also had higher mechanical pain thresholds (784.5 mN [255.0-1078.0]) compared to CPSP (235.2 mN [81.4-1078.0], p = 0.006) and higher mechanical detection threshold compared to control areas (2.7 [1.5-6.2] vs. 1.0 [1.0-3.3], p = 0.007). Evoked pain scores negatively correlated with mechanical pain thresholds (r = -0.38, p < 0.001) and wind-up ratio (r = -0.57, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CNP of different etiologies may present different pain descriptors and somatosensory profiles, which is likely due to injury site differences within the neuroaxis. This information may help better design phenotype mechanism correlations and impact trial designs for the main etiologies of CNP, namely stroke and spinal cord lesions. This study provides evidence that topography may influence pain symptoms and sensory profile. The findings suggest that CNP mechanisms might vary according to pain etiology or lesion topography, impacting future mechanism-based treatment choices.

Optimizing and Accelerating the Development of Precision Pain Treatments for Chronic Pain: IMMPACT Review and Recommendations

Large variability in the individual response to even the most-efficacious pain treatments is observed clinically, which has led to calls for a more personalized, tailored approach to treating patients with pain (ie, "precision pain medicine"). Precision pain medicine, currently an aspirational goal, would consist of empirically based algorithms that determine the optimal treatments, or treatment combinations, for specific patients (ie, targeting the right treatment, in the right dose, to the right patient, at the right time). Answering this question of "what works for whom" will certainly improve the clinical care of patients with pain. It may also support the success of novel drug development in pain, making it easier to identify novel treatments that work for certain patients and more accurately identify the magnitude of the treatment effect for those subgroups. Significant preliminary work has been done in this area, and analgesic trials are beginning to utilize precision pain medicine approaches such as stratified allocation on the basis of prespecified patient phenotypes using assessment methodologies such as quantitative sensory testing. Current major challenges within the field include: 1) identifying optimal measurement approaches to assessing patient characteristics that are most robustly and consistently predictive of inter-patient variation in specific analgesic treatment outcomes, 2) designing clinical trials that can identify treatment-by-phenotype interactions, and 3) selecting the most promising therapeutics to be tested in this way. This review surveys the current state of precision pain medicine, with a focus on drug treatments (which have been most-studied in a precision pain medicine context). It further presents a set of evidence-based recommendations for accelerating the application of precision pain methods in chronic pain research. PERSPECTIVE: Given the considerable variability in treatment outcomes for chronic pain, progress in precision pain treatment is critical for the field. An array of phenotypes and mechanisms contribute to chronic pain; this review summarizes current knowledge regarding which treatments are most effective for patients with specific biopsychosocial characteristics.

Off-label pharmacological treatment for neuropathic pain: A Delphi study by the Spanish Pain Society Neuropathic Pain Task Force

OBJECTIVES

The use of off-label pharmacotherapies for neuropathic pain (NP) is growing relating to the many unmet needs of patients. However, clinical guidelines fail to address it, and the available evidence is sparse and fragmented. We arranged a formal expert consensus to address this controversial issue and provide some guidance on judicious use.

METHODS

A two-round standard Delphi survey that involved pain clinic specialists with experience in the research and management of NP was done over an ad hoc 40-item questionnaire prepared by the authors. Consensus on each statement was defined as at least either 80% endorsement or rejection after the second round.

RESULTS

Forty-three and thirty-seven panelists participated in the first and second round, respectively. Consensus was reached in 34 out of 40 statements. Endorsed alternatives for unresponsive patients include non-gabapentinoid antiepileptics (oxcarbazepine and eslicarbazepine), venlafaxine, intravenous lidocaine (when doses can be optimized), and some vaporized cannabinoids (under appropriate surveillance). In addition, lacosamide, low-dose naltrexone, propofol, or ketamine could prove beneficial if subjected to more research. Other options were rejected, and there was controversy about the usefulness of topical preparations.

DISCUSSION

For patients who do not respond to standard NP treatments, some other viable pharmacological options can be attempted before advancing to other therapeutic stages. This may help patients who are reluctant to or have some contraindication for interventional therapies.

Spinal glycinergic currents are reduced in a rat model of neuropathic pain following partial nerve ligation but not chronic constriction injury

Animal models have consistently indicated that central sensitization and the development of chronic neuropathic pain are linked to changes to inhibitory signaling in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. However, replication of data investigating the cellular mechanisms that underlie these changes remains a challenge and there is still a lack of understanding about what aspects of spinal inhibitory transmission most strongly contribute to the disease. Here, we compared the effect of two different sciatic nerve injuries commonly used to generate rodent models of neuropathic pain on spinal glycinergic signaling. Using whole cell patch-clamp electrophysiology in spinal slices, we recorded from neurons in the lamina II of the dorsal horn and evoked inhibitory postsynaptic currents with a stimulator in lamina III, where glycinergic cell bodies are concentrated. We found that glycine inputs onto radial neurons were reduced following partial nerve ligation (PNL) of the sciatic nerve, consistent with a previous report. However, this finding was not replicated in animals that underwent chronic constriction injury (CCI) to the same nerve region. To limit the between-experiment variability, we kept the rat species, sex, and age consistent and had a single investigator carry out the surgeries. These data show that PNL and CCI cause divergent spinal signaling outcomes in the cord and add to the body of evidence suggesting that treatments for neuropathic pain should be triaged according to nerve injury or cellular dysfunction rather than the symptoms of the disease.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Neuropathic pain models are used in preclinical research to investigate the mechanisms underlying allodynia, a common symptom of neuropathic pain, and to test, develop, and validate therapies for persistent pain. We demonstrate that a glycinergic dysfunction is consistently associated with partial nerve ligation but not the chronic constriction injury model. This suggests that the cellular effects produced by each injury are distinct and that data from different neuropathic pain models should be considered separately.

Maximizing treatment efficacy through patient stratification in neuropathic pain trials

Treatment of neuropathic pain remains inadequate despite the elucidation of multiple pathophysiological mechanisms and the development of promising therapeutic compounds. The lack of success in translating knowledge into clinical practice has discouraged pharmaceutical companies from investing in pain medicine; however, new patient stratification approaches could help bridge the translation gap and develop individualized therapeutic approaches. As we highlight in this article, subgrouping of patients according to sensory profiles and other baseline characteristics could aid the prediction of treatment success. Furthermore, novel outcome measures have been developed for patients with neuropathic pain. The extent to which sensory profiles and outcome measures can be employed in routine clinical practice and clinical trials and across distinct neuropathic pain aetiologies is yet to be determined. Improvements in animal models, drawing on our knowledge of human pain, and robust public-private partnerships will be needed to pave the way to innovative and effective pain medicine in the future.

A Comparison of Self-reported Pain Measures Between Sensory Phenotypes in HIV-associated Sensory Neuropathy

Painful HIV-associated neuropathy (HIV-SN) is a prevalent co-morbidity of HIV infection. Sensory phenotyping, using quantitative sensory testing (QST) could allow for improved stratification to guide personalized treatment. However, previous methods of QST interpretation have demonstrated limited association with self-reported pain measures. This study sought to identify differences in self-reported pain measures between composite QST-derived sensory phenotypes, and to examine any differences in participants reporting multi-site, multi-etiology chronic pain. In this cross-sectional observational study of participants with HIV (n = 133), individuals were allocated to neuropathy and neuropathic pain groups through clinical assessment and nerve conduction testing. They completed symptom-based questionnaires and underwent standardized QST. Participants were assigned, by pre-determined algorithm, to a QST-derived sensory phenotype. Symptoms were compared between sensory phenotypes. Symptom characteristics and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory scores differed between QST-derived sensory phenotypes: 'sensory loss' was associated with more paroxysmal and paraesthetic symptoms compared to 'thermal hyperalgesia' and 'healthy' phenotypes (P = .023-0.001). Those with painful HIV-SN and additional chronic pain diagnoses were more frequently allocated to the 'mechanical hyperalgesia' phenotype compared to those with painful HIV-SN alone (P = .006). This study describes heterogeneous sensory phenotypes in people living with HIV. Differences in self-reported pain outcomes between sensory phenotypes has the potential to guide future stratified trials and eventually more targeted therapy. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents quantitative sensory testing derived phenotypes, thought to reflect differing pathophysiological pain mechanisms and relates them to self-reported pain measures in people with HIV infection. This could help clinicians stratify patients to individualize analgesic interventions more effectively.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Chronic Neuropathic Pain Clinical Trials - A Systematic Literature Review

In neuropathic pain clinical trials, the patient's perspective is often insufficiently reflected focusing mainly on pain intensity. Comparability of outcome assessment is limited due to heterogenous patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Embase databases and reference lists of published meta-analyses were searched. Randomized controlled studies assessing treatment efficacy of drugs for chronic neuropathic pain were included. PROMs were assigned to recommended IMMPACT/NeuPSIG domains: pain intensity, pain other aspects, physical functioning, emotional functioning, global improvement and satisfaction, adverse events, participant disposition. Domains and PROMs were compared regarding the publication year and methodological quality of the studies. Within the 251 included studies 200 PROMs were used with 27 being recommended by IMMPACT/NeuPSIG. The number of domains was higher in high/moderate quality studies. The (sub-) domains 'physical functioning', 'global improvement and satisfaction', and 'neuropathic pain quality' were assessed more frequently in high/moderate quality studies and those published after 2011. Recent studies and those of better quality more often used the recommended PROMs. Although neuropathic assessment via PROMs has improved, there is still a high heterogeneity. A standardized core set of outcome domains and should be defined to improve neuropathic pain treatment and to achieve better comparability of clinical trials. Perspective: This systematic literature review assesses the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in chronic neuropathic pain. The results show that there is still a high heterogeneity, highlighting the need for a standardized core set of outcome domains and PROMs to improve comparability of clinical trials and neuropathic pain treatment.

Small-fibre damage is associated with distinct sensory phenotypes in patients with fibromyalgia and small-fibre neuropathy

BACKGROUND

In this clinical and psychophysical study, we aimed to verify whether patients with fibromyalgia with and without small-fibre pathology and patients with pure small-fibre neuropathy share common sensory phenotypes.

METHODS

Using an algorithm based on quantitative sensory testing variables, we grouped 64 consecutive patients with fibromyalgia (20 with small-fibre pathology, 44 without) and 30 patients with pure small-fibre neuropathy into different sensory phenotypes: sensory loss, thermal hyperalgesia, mechanical hyperalgesia and healthy phenotypes.

RESULTS

We found that the frequency of the different sensory phenotypes differed markedly between patients with fibromyalgia and patients with small-fibre neuropathy. In patients with fibromyalgia, with and without small-fibre pathology, healthy and hyperalgesia phenotypes (both thermal and mechanical) were similarly represented, whilst sensory loss and mechanical hyperalgesia phenotypes were the most frequent phenotypes in patients with small-fibre neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that small-fibre damage is associated with distinct sensory phenotypes in patients with fibromyalgia and in patients with small-fibre neuropathy. The lack of phenotype differences between patients with fibromyalgia with and without small-fibre pathology and the relatively high frequency of the healthy phenotype in these patients highlight a complex relationship between small-fibre pathology and pain in patients with fibromyalgia.

Precision Medicine in Neuropathic Pain

Neuropathic pain is a common chronic pain condition that is caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. The multitude of sensory negative and positive sensations and associated comorbidities have a major impact on quality of life of affected patients. Current treatment options often only lead to a partial pain relief or are even completely ineffective. In addition, many clinical trials for the development of new drugs have not met the primary endpoint. Therefore, there is still an unmet clinical need in neuropathic pain syndromes. One reason for this therapeutic dilemma could be the heterogeneity of neuropathic pain with a variety of pathophysiological pain mechanisms that are expressed differently in each patient regardless of the underlying disease etiology. Reclassification of neuropathic pain syndromes therefore focuses on the underlying mechanisms of pain development rather than the disease etiology. A priori stratification of patients based on these individual mechanisms could allow the identification of potential treatment responders and thus realize the concept of a mechanism-based treatment. As no biomarkers for pain mechanisms have been discovered yet, one has to rely on surrogate markers that are thought to be closely related to these mechanisms. In this chapter, we present promising predictive biomarkers, focusing in particular on sensory symptoms and signs assessed by patient-reported outcome measures and sensory testing, and discuss how these tools might be used in clinical trials in the future.

Applying the Rapid OPPERA Algorithm to Predict Persistent Pain Outcomes Among a Cohort of Women Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery

Persistent postmastectomy pain after breast surgery is variable in duration and severity across patients, due in part to interindividual variability in pain processing. The Rapid OPPERA Algorithm (ROPA) empirically identified 3 clusters of patients with different risk of chronic pain based on 4 key psychophysical and psychosocial characteristics. We aimed to test this type of group-based clustering within in a perioperative cohort undergoing breast surgery to investigate differences in postsurgical pain outcomes. Women (N = 228) scheduled for breast cancer surgery were prospectively enrolled in a longitudinal observational study. Pressure pain threshold (PPT), anxiety, depression, and somatization were assessed preoperatively. At 2-weeks, 3, 6, and 12-months after surgery, patients reported surgical area pain severity, impact of pain on cognitive/emotional and physical functioning, and pain catastrophizing. The ROPA clustering, which used patients' preoperative anxiety, depression, somatization, and PPT scores, assigned patients to 3 groups: Adaptive (low psychosocial scores, high PPT), Pain Sensitive (moderate psychosocial scores, low PPT), and Global Symptoms (high psychosocial scores, moderate PPT). The Global Symptoms cluster, compared to other clusters, reported significantly worse persistent pain outcomes following surgery. Findings suggest that patient characteristic-based clustering algorithms, like ROPA, may generalize across diverse diagnoses and clinical settings, indicating the importance of "person type" in understanding pain variability. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the practical translation of a previously developed patient clustering solution, based within a chronic pain cohort, to a perioperative cohort of women undergoing breast cancer surgery. Such preoperative characterization could potentially help clinicians apply personalized interventions based on predictions concerning postsurgical pain.

Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients

Background and objectives

The identification of predictors of response to antiCGRP mAbs could favor tailored therapies and personalized treatment plans. This study is aimed at investigating predictors of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% response at 24 weeks in patients with high-frequency episodic (HFEM: 8–14 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM).

Methods

This is a large, multicenter, cohort, real-life study. We considered all consecutive adult patients affected by HFEM or CM who were prescribed antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks in 20 headache centers. Patients were interviewed face-to-face using a shared semi-structured questionnaire carefully exploring socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients received subcutaneous erenumab (70 mg or140 mg, monthly), galcanezumab (120 mg monthly, following a 240 mg loading dose), or fremanezumab (225 mg, monthly or 675 mg, quarterly) according to drug market availability, physician’s choice, or patient’s preference. The primary endpoint of the study was the assessment of ≥ 50% response predictors at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included ≥ 75% and 100% response predictors at 24 weeks.

Results

Eight hundred sixty-four migraine patients had been treated with antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks (erenumab: 639 pts; galcanezumab: 173 pts; fremanezumab: 55 pts). The ≥50% response (primary endpoint) in HFEM was positively associated with unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UAs) (OR:4.23, 95%CI:1.57–11.4; p = 0.004), while in CM was positively associated with UAs (OR:1.49, 95%CI:1.05–2.11; p = 0.026), UP + UAs (OR:1.90, 95%CI:1.15–3.16; p = 0.012), UP + allodynia (OR:1.71, 95%CI:1.04–2.83; p = 0.034), and negatively associated with obesity (OR:0.21, 95%CI:0.07–0.64; p = 0.006). The 75% response (secondary endpoint) was positively associated with UP + UAs in HFEM (OR:3.44, 95%CI:1.42–8.31; p = 0.006) and with UP + UAs (OR:1.78, 95%CI:1.14–2.80; p = 0.012) and UP + allodynia (OR:1.92, 95%CI:1.22–3.06; p = 0.005) in CM. No predictor of 100% response emerged in patients with HFEM or CM.

Conclusions

A critical evaluation of headache characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help in predicting responsiveness to antiCGRP mAbs in HFEM and CM. A more precise pain profiling may represent a steppingstone for a mechanism-based approach and personalized treatment of migraine with compounds targeting specific molecular mechanisms.

Continuum of sensory profiles in diabetes mellitus patients with and without neuropathy and pain

BACKGROUND

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) assesses the functional integrity of small and large nerve fibre afferents and central somatosensory pathways; QST was assumed to provide insight into the mechanisms of neuropathy. We analysed QST profiles and phenotypes in patients with diabetes mellitus to study whether these could differentiate patients with and without pain and neuropathy.

METHODS

A standardized QST protocol was performed and 'loss and gain of function' abnormalities were analysed in four groups of subjects: diabetic patients with painful (pDSPN; n = 220) and non-painful distal symmetric polyneuropathy (nDSPN; n = 219), diabetic patients without neuropathy (DM; n = 23) and healthy non-diabetic subjects (n = 37). Based on the QST findings, diabetic subjects were further stratified into four predefined prototypic phenotypes: sensory loss (SL), thermal hyperalgesia (TH), mechanical hyperalgesia (MH) and healthy individuals.

RESULTS

Patients in the pDSPN group showed the greatest hyposensitivity ('loss of function'), and DM patients showed the lowest, with statistically significant increases in thermal, thermal pain, mechanical and mechanical pain sensory thresholds. Accordingly, the frequency of the SL phenotype was significantly higher in the pDSPN subgroup (41.8%), than expected (p &lt; 0.0042). The proportion of 'gain of function' abnormalities was low in both pDSPN and nDSPN patients without significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a continuum in the sensory profiles of diabetic patients, with a more pronounced sensory loss in pDSPN group probably reflecting somatosensory nerve fibre degeneration. An analysis of 'gain of function' abnormalities (allodynia, hyperalgesia) did not offer a key to understanding the pathophysiology of spontaneous diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

SIGNIFICANCE

This article, using quantitative sensory testing profiles in large cohorts of diabetic patients with and without polyneuropathy and pain, presents a continuum in the sensory profiles of diabetic patients, with more pronounced 'loss of function' abnormalities in painful polyneuropathy patients. Painful diabetic polyneuropathy probably represents a 'more progressed' type of neuropathy with more pronounced somatosensory nerve fibre degeneration. The proportion of 'gain of function' sensory abnormalities was low, and these offer limited understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms of spontaneous neuropathic pain.

Sensory testing might not be perfect - but it is the best biomarker for pain phenotypes we have right now

Currently available treatments for neuropathic pain fail in roughly half of the patients - and it is impossible to predict which treatments will help patients. Stratification of neuropathic pain patients is needed, and sensory profiling has so far been the most promising approach: it has been shown to be responsive to treatment, linked to potential mechanisms, and, most importantly, predictive of treatment success. Despite a number of limitations, it is the currently most promising stratification tool and should be refined rather than disregarded.

Lessons learned - Moving on from QST sensory profiles

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has been optimized to diagnose in particular small fiber neuropathy and has been successfully used for decades. "Sensory phenotypes" have been derived from the QST data in an attempt to stratify patients with chronic pain and to gain mechanistic insights. However, studies consistently show that there is no difference in sensory phenotypes between neuropathy patients with and without pain and no successful stratification has been shown using the current version of "sensory phenotypes". Thus, after falsification of the initial hypothesis it is time to focus on more promising approaches.

Recent updates in the treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy

Distal symmetric diabetic peripheral polyneuropathy (DPN) is the most common form of neuropathy in the world, affecting 30 to 50% of diabetic individuals and resulting in significant morbidity and socioeconomic costs. This review summarizes updates in the diagnosis and management of DPN. Recently updated clinical criteria facilitate bedside diagnosis, and a number of new technologies are being explored for diagnostic confirmation in specific settings and for use as surrogate measures in clinical trials. Evolving literature indicates that distinct but overlapping mechanisms underlie neuropathy in type 1 versus type 2 diabetes, and there is a growing focus on the role of metabolic factors in the development and progression of DPN. Exercise-based lifestyle interventions have shown therapeutic promise. A variety of potential disease-modifying and symptomatic therapies are in development. Innovations in clinical trial design include the incorporation of detailed pain phenotyping and biomarkers for central sensitization.

Optimal pharmacotherapy pathway in adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain: the OPTION-DM RCT

BACKGROUND

The mainstay of treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain is pharmacotherapy, but the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline is not based on robust evidence, as the treatments and their combinations have not been directly compared.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the most clinically beneficial, cost-effective and tolerated treatment pathway for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

A randomised crossover trial with health economic analysis.

SETTING

Twenty-one secondary care centres in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain with a 7-day average self-rated pain score of ≥ 4 points (Numeric Rating Scale 0-10).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised to three commonly used treatment pathways: (1) amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, (2) duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin and (3) pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline. Participants and research teams were blinded to treatment allocation, using over-encapsulated capsules and matching placebos. Site pharmacists were unblinded.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was the difference in 7-day average 24-hour Numeric Rating Scale score between pathways, measured during the final week of each pathway. Secondary end points included 7-day average daily Numeric Rating Scale pain score at week 6 between monotherapies, quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-36 items), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score, the proportion of patients achieving 30% and 50% pain reduction, Brief Pain Inventory - Modified Short Form items scores, Insomnia Severity Index score, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory score, tolerability (scale 0-10), Patient Global Impression of Change score at week 16 and patients' preferred treatment pathway at week 50. Adverse events and serious adverse events were recorded. A within-trial cost-utility analysis was carried out to compare treatment pathways using incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years from an NHS and social care perspective.

RESULTS

A total of 140 participants were randomised from 13 UK centres, 130 of whom were included in the analyses. Pain score at week 16 was similar between the arms, with a mean difference of -0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.3 points) for duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, a mean difference of -0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.3 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin and a mean difference of 0.0 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.4 to 0.4 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin. Results for tolerability, discontinuation and quality of life were similar. The adverse events were predictable for each drug. Combination therapy (weeks 6-16) was associated with a further reduction in Numeric Rating Scale pain score (mean 1.0 points, 98.3% confidence interval 0.6 to 1.3 points) compared with those who remained on monotherapy (mean 0.2 points, 98.3% confidence interval -0.1 to 0.5 points). The pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline pathway had the fewest monotherapy discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events and was most commonly preferred (most commonly preferred by participants: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, 24%; duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin, 33%; pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, 43%; p = 0.26). No single pathway was superior in cost-effectiveness. The incremental gains in quality-adjusted life-years were small for each pathway comparison [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin -0.002 (95% confidence interval -0.011 to 0.007) quality-adjusted life-years, amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline -0.006 (95% confidence interval -0.002 to 0.014) quality-adjusted life-years and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline 0.007 (95% confidence interval 0.0002 to 0.015) quality-adjusted life-years] and incremental costs over 16 weeks were similar [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin -£113 (95% confidence interval -£381 to £90), amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £155 (95% confidence interval -£37 to £625) and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £141 (95% confidence interval -£13 to £398)].

LIMITATIONS

Although there was no placebo arm, there is strong evidence for the use of each study medication from randomised placebo-controlled trials. The addition of a placebo arm would have increased the duration of this already long and demanding trial and it was not felt to be ethically justifiable.

FUTURE WORK

Future research should explore (1) variations in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain management at the practice level, (2) how OPTION-DM (Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus) trial findings can be best implemented, (3) why some patients respond to a particular drug and others do not and (4) what options there are for further treatments for those patients on combination treatment with inadequate pain relief.

CONCLUSIONS

The three treatment pathways appear to give comparable patient outcomes at similar costs, suggesting that the optimal treatment may depend on patients' preference in terms of side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered as ISRCTN17545443 and EudraCT 2016-003146-89.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme, and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Predicting Treatment Response with Sensory Phenotyping in Post-Traumatic Neuropathic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Currently available treatments for neuropathic pain are only modestly efficacious when assessed in randomized clinical trials and work for only some patients in the clinic. Induced-pain or gain-of-function phenotypes have been shown to predict response to analgesics (vs placebos) in patients with neuropathic pain. However, the predictive value of these phenotypes has never been studied in post-traumatic neuropathic pain.

METHODS

Mixed-effects models for repeated measures were used to evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin vs placebo in subgroups with induced-pain phenotypes (i.e., hyperalgesia or allodynia) in data from a recent, multinational randomized clinical trial (N = 539) that identified phenotypic subgroups through the use of a structured clinical exam.

RESULTS

The difference in mean pain score between the active and placebo groups (i.e., delta) after 15 weeks of treatment for the subgroup with hyperalgesia was -0.76 (P = 0.001), compared with 0.19 (P = 0.47) for the subgroup that did not have hyperalgesia. The treatment-by-phenotype interaction, which tests whether subgroups have statistically different treatment responses, was significant (P = 0.0067). The delta for the subgroup with allodynia was -0.31 (P = 0.22), compared with -0.30 (P = 0.22) for the subgroup that did not have allodynia (treatment-by-phenotype interaction P = 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that hyperalgesia, but not allodynia, predicts response to pregabalin in patients with chronic post-traumatic neuropathic pain. This study extends the growing data supporting the utility of induced-pain phenotypes to predict response to analgesics in post-traumatic neuropathic pain. Sensory phenotyping in large, multisite trials through the use of a structured clinical exam has the potential to accelerate the development of new analgesics and improve the generalizability of clinical trial results.