Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin in Neuropathic Pain Followed Spinal Cord Injury: A Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Treating neuropathic pain and comorbid affective disorders: Preclinical and clinical evidence

INTRODUCTION

Neuropathic pain (NP) significantly impacts quality of life and often coexists with affective disorders such as anxiety and depression. Addressing both NP and its psychiatric manifestations requires a comprehensive understanding of therapeutic options. This study aimed to review the main pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for NP and comorbid affective disorders to describe their mechanisms of action and how they are commonly used in clinical practice.

METHODS

A review was conducted across five electronic databases, focusing on pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for NP and its associated affective disorders. The following combination of MeSH and title/abstract keywords were used: "neuropathic pain," "affective disorders," "depression," "anxiety," "treatment," and "therapy." Both animal and human studies were included to discuss the underlying therapeutic mechanisms of these interventions.

RESULTS

Pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and opioids, modulate neural synaptic transmission to alleviate NP. Topical agents, such as capsaicin, lidocaine patches, and botulinum toxin A, offer localized relief by desensitizing pain pathways. Some of these drugs, especially antidepressants, also treat comorbid affective disorders. Non-pharmacological techniques, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and photobiomodulation therapy, modulate cortical activity and have shown promise for NP and mood disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

The interconnection between NP and comorbid affective disorders necessitates holistic therapeutic strategies. Some pharmacological treatments can be used for both conditions, and non-pharmacological interventions have emerged as promising complementary approaches. Future research should explore novel molecular pathways to enhance treatment options for these interrelated conditions.

Deprescribing interventions for gabapentinoids in adults: A scoping review

The emerging issue of rising gabapentinoid misuse is being recognized alongside the lack of current evidence supporting the safe and effective deprescribing of gabapentinoids. This scoping review aimed to assess the extent and nature of gabapentinoid deprescribing interventions in adults, either in reducing dosages, or prescribing of, gabapentinoids. Electronic databases were searched on 23 February 2022 without restrictions. Eligible studies included randomized, non-randomized and observational studies that assessed an intervention aimed at reducing/ceasing the prescription/use of a gabapentinoid in adults for any indication in a clinical setting. The research outcomes investigated the type of intervention, prescribing rates, cessations, patient outcomes and adverse events. Extracted outcome data were categorized as either short (≤3 months), intermediate (>3 but <12 months) or long (≥12 months) term. A narrative synthesis was conducted. The four included studies were conducted in primary and acute care settings. Interventions were of dose-reducing protocols, education and/or pharmacological-based approaches. In the randomized trials, gabapentinoid use could be ceased in at least one third of participants. In the two observational trials, gabapentinoid prescribing rates decreased by 9%. Serious adverse events and adverse events specifically related to gabapentinoids were reported in one trial. No study included patient-focused psychological interventions in the deprescribing process, nor provided any long-term follow-up. This review highlights the lack of existing evidence in this area. Due to limited available data, our review was unable to make any firm judgements on the most effective gabapentinoid deprescribing interventions in adults, highlighting the need for more research in this area.

Mirogabalin for Central Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Study in Asia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) commonly experience central neuropathic pain (CNeP), which is challenging to treat. Mirogabalin is effective for peripheral neuropathic pain, but evidence for CNeP is lacking.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study investigated mirogabalin efficacy and safety for the treatment of CNeP in patients with traumatic SCI. Adult patients from 120 sites throughout Japan, Korea, and Taiwan were randomized (1:1) to receive placebo or mirogabalin (5 mg twice daily [BID] for 1 week, 10 mg BID for 1 week, and 10 or 15 mg BID for 12 weeks). Patients with moderate renal impairment received half the dosage. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the weekly average daily pain score (ADPS) at week 14. The secondary endpoints included ADPS responder rates, the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), average daily sleep interference score (ADSIS), and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI). Adverse events were monitored for safety.

RESULTS

Each treatment group comprised 150 patients. Mirogabalin elicited a statistical and clinically relevant improvement in change from baseline in the weekly ADPS at week 14 (least-squares mean difference [95% CI] vs placebo -0.71 [-1.08 to -0.34], p = 0.0001). Responder rates at week 14 were higher for mirogabalin than those for placebo (odds ratio [95% CI] 1.91 [1.11-3.27] for the ≥30% responder rate; 2.52 [1.11-5.71] for the ≥50% responder rate). Statistical improvements (i.e., least-squares mean difference [95% CI] vs placebo) were also observed in the SF-MPQ (-2.4 [-3.8 to -1.1]), ADSIS -0.71 (-1.04 to -0.38), and NPSI -7.7 (-11.1 to -4.4) scores. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild; no serious adverse drug reactions were reported.

DISCUSSION

Mirogabalin elicited clinically relevant decreases in pain and was well tolerated, suggesting that mirogabalin is a promising treatment for patients with CNeP due to SCI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03901352); first submitted April 3, 2019; first patient enrolled March 14, 2019; available at clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03901352.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class I evidence that in adult patients with CNeP due to traumatic SCI, mirogabalin, 10 or 15 mg BID, effectively improves weekly ADPS at week 14.

Pregabalin in patients with post-traumatic peripheral neuropathic pain: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of pregabalin versus placebo in post-traumatic peripheral neuropathic pain (PTNP).

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant evidence up to January 2022. The Cochran tool was used to assess the quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Data analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.

RESULTS

Three RCTs involving 821 patients were included in the meta-analysis. A significant difference was observed between pregabalin and placebo in terms of the pain score (the standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.14, 95% CI: 0.28 to -0.006, p = 0.04) and sleep interference (MD = -0.25, 95% CI: -0.39 to -0.11, p = 0.00). There was also a significant difference between pregabalin and placebo regarding somnolence (risk ratio [RR] = 2.78; 95% CI: 1.64-4.71, p = 0.00), dizziness (RR = 4.13; 95% CI: 2.71-6.28, p = 0.00), and disturbance in attention (RR: 2.97; 95% CI: 1.02-8.65, p = 0.04). However, no significant difference was observed between pregabalin and placebo in terms of headache (RR = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.70-2.06, p = 0.50), fatigue (RR = 1.42; 95% CI: 0.82-2.47, p = 0.20), nausea (RR = 1.52; 95% CI: 0.88-2.62, p = 0.13), constipation (RR = 1.84; 95% CI: 0.78-4.29, p = 0.15), and discontinuation (RR = 1.52; 95% CI: 0.45-5.06, p = 0.49).

CONCLUSION

Compared with placebo, pregabalin showed better efficacy in reducing PTNP and improving sleep interference. However, it was associated with higher adverse events. Further RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Esketamine combined with pregabalin on acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing resection of spinal neoplasms: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Perioperative pain management is one of the most challenging issues for patients with spinal neoplasms. Inadequate postoperative analgesia usually leads to severe postsurgical pain, which could cause patients to suffer from many other related complications. Meanwhile, there is no appropriate analgesic strategy for patients with spinal neoplasms.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a protocol for a randomized double-blind controlled trial to evaluate the effect of esketamine combined with pregabalin on postsurgical pain in spinal surgery. Patients aged 18 to 65 years scheduled for spinal neoplasm resection will be randomly allocated into the combined and control groups in a 1:1 ratio. In the combined group, esketamine will be given during the during the surgery procedure until 48-h postoperative period, and pregabalin will be taken from 2 h before the surgery to 2 weeks postoperatively. The control group will receive normal saline and placebo capsules at the same time points. Both groups received a background analgesic regimen by using patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (containing 100 μg sufentanil and 16 mg ondansetron) until 2 days after surgery. To ensure the accuracy and reliability of this trial, all the researchers and patients will be blinded until the completion of this study. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients with acute moderate-to-severe postsurgical pain (visual analog scale, VAS ≥ 40, range: 0-100, with 0, no pain; 100, the worst pain) during the 48-h postoperative period. The secondary outcomes will include the maximal VAS scores (when the patients felt the most intense pain over the last 24 h before being interviewed) at 0-2 h, 2-24 h, 24-48 h, and 48-72 h after leaving the operating room and 24 h before discharge; the incidence of acute moderate-to-severe postsurgical pain at each other time point; chronic postsurgical pain assessment; neuropathic pain assessment; and the incidence of drug-related adverse events and other postoperative complications, such as postoperative delirium and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of esketamine combined with pregabalin on acute postsurgical pain in patients undergoing resection of spinal neoplasms. The safety of this perioperative pain management strategy will also be examined.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05096468. Registered on October 27, 2021.

Interventions for Depressive Symptoms in People Living with Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses

OBJECTIVE

This review investigated the effectiveness of clinical interventions on depressive symptoms in people with all types of chronic pain.

METHODS

We searched seven electronic databases and reference lists on September 15, 2020, and included English-language, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of trials that examined the effects of clinical interventions on depressive outcomes in chronic pain. Two independent reviewers screened, extracted, and assessed the risk of bias. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019131871.

RESULTS

Eighty-three reviews were selected and included 182 meta-analyses. Data were summarized visually and narratively using standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals as the primary outcome of interest. A large proportion of meta-analyses investigated fibromyalgia or mixed chronic pain, and psychological interventions were most commonly evaluated. Acceptance and commitment therapy for general chronic pain, and fluoxetine and web-based psychotherapy for fibromyalgia showed the most robust effects and can be prioritized for implementation in clinical practice. Exercise for arthritis, pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, self-regulatory psychotherapy for axial pain, and music therapy for general chronic pain showed large, significant effects, but estimates were derived from low- or critically low-quality reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

No single intervention type demonstrated substantial superiority across multiple pain populations. Other dimensions beyond efficacy, such as accessibility, safety, cost, patient preference, and efficacy for non-depressive outcomes should also be weighed when considering treatment options. Further effectiveness research is required for common pain types such as arthritis and axial pain, and common interventions such as opioids, anti-inflammatories and acupuncture.

Intensive Locomotor Training Provides Sustained Alleviation of Chronic Spinal Cord Injury-Associated Neuropathic Pain: A Two-Year Pre-Clinical Study

Neuropathic pain often accompanies the functional deficits associated with spinal cord injury (SCI) and further reduces a patient's quality of life. Clinical and pre-clinical research is beginning to highlight the beneficial role that rehabilitative therapies such as locomotor training can have not only on functional recovery but also on chronic pain management. Our group has previously developed an intensive locomotor training (ILT) treadmill protocol on rats that reduced SCI neuropathic pain symptoms for at least 3 months. We have extended these findings in the current study to evaluate the ability of regular ILT regimen over a 2 year period post-SCI to maintain neuropathic pain reduction. To assess this, the rat clip compression SCI model (T7/8) was used and treadmill training was initiated starting 4 weeks after SCI and continuing through the duration of the study. Results showed continued suppression of SCI neuropathic pain responses (reduced mechanical, heat, and cold hypersensitivity throughout the entire time course of the study). In contrast, non-exercised rats showed consistent and sustained neuropathic pain responses during this period. In addition, prolonged survival and improved locomotor outcomes were observed in rats undergoing ILT as the study longevity progressed. Potential contributory mechanisms underlying beneficial effects of ILT include reduced inflammation and restoration of anti-nociceptive inhibitory processes as indicated by neurochemical assays in spinal tissue of remaining rats at 2 years post-SCI. The benefits of chronic ILT suggest that long-term physical exercise therapy can produce powerful and prolonged management of neuropathic pain, partly through sustained reduction of spinal pathological processes.

Effect of non-invasive brain stimulation on neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, some studies indicated that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) could relieve neuropathic pain (NP) following a spinal cord injury (SCI), whereas some studies showed no pain relief effect. In addition, some studies showed the analgesic effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on NP post SCI, whereas other studies showed no effect.

METHODS

We systematically searched on the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, Google Scholar for studies exploring the analgesic effect of rTMS or tDCS on NP post SCI until November 2019. Meta-analysis was conducted to summarize results of these studies.

RESULTS

The present quantitative meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in the effect of treatment on NP following SCI between rTMS and sham rTMS over the motor cortex at about 1 week after the end of the rTMS period (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 2.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.27 to 6.04). However, the study indicated that rTMS showed significantly better pain relief of treatment compared with sham rTMS between 2 and 6 weeks after the end of the rTMS period (SMD = 3.81, 95%CI: 0.80-7.52). However, no sufficient evidence could be provided to make a meta-analysis for the analgesic effect of tDCS on NP following SCI over the primary motor area (M1).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggested that rTMS did not show early analgesic effect on NP after SCI, but showed better middle-term analgesic effect, compared with sham rTMS. More large scale, blinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were needed to explore the analgesic effect of rTMS and tDCS on NP following SCI.

Management Strategies for Spinal Cord Injury Pain Updated for the Twenty-First Century

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) often results in several life-altering impairments, including paralysis, sensory loss, and neurogenic bowel/bladder dysfunction. Some of these SCI-related conditions can be accommodated with compensatory strategies. Perhaps no SCI-associated condition is more troublesome and recalcitrant to the treating physiatrist than chronic neuropathic pain. In addition to the expected challenges in treating any chronic pain condition, treatment of SCI-related pain has the added difficulty of disruption of normal neural pathways that subserve pain transmission and attenuation. This article reviews selected treatment strategies for SCI-associated neuropathic pain.