Pain relief with lidocaine 5% patch in localized peripheral neuropathic pain in relation to pain phenotype: a randomised, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, phenotype panel study

Lidocaine patch for treatment of acute localized pain in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lidocaine patches are commonly prescribed for acute localized pain. Most of the existing evidence is, however, derived from postoperative or chronic pain. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of lidocaine patch compared to placebo patch or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for acute localized pain. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials randomizing patients with acute localized pain to lidocaine patch versus placebo patch or NSAIDs. The outcomes were change in pain score (any validated scale) from baseline to a specific time endpoint (primary efficacy); adverse events (primary harm), and time to exit the study due to reaching a pain relief target (secondary). We used Cochrane revised tool to assess the risk of bias and GRADE to rate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and Cochrane Q test for heterogeneity. Data were summarized as risk ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence interval (CI). We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other major databases, identifying 10 randomized controlled trials with a total of 523 patients. These trials collectively found that lidocaine patches were more effective in controlling both musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain compared to placebo patches. Due to heterogeneity among the studies, we did not pool the efficacy data. The risk of adverse events was similar between the groups (risk ratio: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.48-1.67; moderate-quality evidence). In the two trials comparing lidocaine patches with NSAIDs, there was no statistically significant difference in pain relief between the treatments. Low to moderate-quality evidence from small trials supports the efficacy and safety of lidocaine patch for the treatment of acute localized pain.

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.

Pharmacologic and Nonpharmacologic Management of Neuropathic Pain

Disorders of the somatosensory nervous system that cause neuropathic pain are treated in a variety of ways. Herein, we introduce a stepwise approach to treating neuropathic pain. We then summarize the available data and guidelines for treating neuropathic pain, both with pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic methods, and provide a synthesized algorithm highlighting the similarities and differences between recent guidelines on the management of neuropathic pain. Pharmacologic treatments are primarily antiseizure medications (e.g., gabapentinoids, sodium channel blockers) and antidepressant medications (e.g., tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors), though other medications and interventional pharmacologic therapies can also be considered. There are a wide variety of nonpharmacologic treatments for neuropathic pain including neuromodulation, nerve stimulation, physiotherapy, movement therapies, lifestyle modification, nutritional supplements, acupuncture, and mind-body techniques.

8. Herpes zoster and post herpetic neuralgia

INTRODUCTION

Patients suffering from postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) report unilateral chronic pain in one or more dermatomes after an acute herpes zoster (HZ) infection. The incidence of acute HZ ranges between three and five patients per 1000 person-years. In one out of four patients, acute HZ-related pain will transition into PHN. PHN can be very disabling for patients and reduce quality of life. Additionally, the treatment of PHN is characterized by high failure rates. The aim of this review is to give an update on the previous practical guideline published in 2011 and revised in 2015 (published in 2019) and to provide an overview of current interventional treatment options for HZ infection and PHN.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of HZ and PHN was systematically reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

The most important treatment for acute HZ-related pain is antiviral therapy within 72 h of symptom onset. Additional symptomatic treatment options are analgesic drugs according to the WHO pain ladder, tricyclic antidepressants (eg, nortriptyline), and antiepileptic drugs (eg, gabapentin). If pain is not sufficiently reduced, interventional treatment such as an epidural injection with local anesthetics and corticosteroids or pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) are options. Treatment for PHN is preferably transdermal capsaicin, lidocaine, or oral drugs such as antidepressants or antiepileptics.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of acute HZ-related pain especially PHN is challenging. Besides the conventional treatment for PHN, interventional management is considered a new treatment option. PRF of DRG seems to be the most promising interventional management.

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.

Pharmacotherapy and noninvasive neurostimulation for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain poses a significant challenge due to its complex mechanisms, necessitating specific treatments. In recent decades, significant progress has been made in the clinical research of neuropathic pain, marking a shift from empirical strategies to evidence-based medicine in its management. This review outlines both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. Antidepressants (tricyclic and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors), antiepileptics (gabapentin, pregabalin), and topical agents constitute the main pharmacological treatments. These approaches target peripheral or central mechanisms associated with neuropathic pain. Noninvasive neurostimulation, including transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), provides non-pharmacological alternatives. However, challenges persist in effectively targeting existing medications and developing drugs that act on novel targets, necessitating innovative therapeutic strategies.

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.

Multicenter, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Crossover Trial Evaluating Topical Lidocaine for Mechanical Cervical Pain

BACKGROUND

There are few efficacious treatments for mechanical neck pain, with controlled trials suggesting efficacy for muscle relaxants and topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Although studies evaluating topical lidocaine for back pain have been disappointing, the more superficial location of the cervical musculature suggests a possible role for topical local anesthetics.

METHODS

This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial performed at four U.S. military, Veterans Administration, academic, and private practice sites, in which 76 patients were randomized to receive either placebo followed by lidocaine patch for 4-week intervals (group 1) or a lidocaine-then-placebo patch sequence. The primary outcome measure was mean reduction in average neck pain, with a positive categorical outcome designated as a reduction of at least 2 points in average neck pain coupled with at least a 5-point score of 7 points on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale at the 4-week endpoint.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome, the median reduction in average neck pain score was -1.0 (interquartile range, -2.0, 0.0) for the lidocaine phase versus -0.5 (interquartile range, -2.0, 0.0) for placebo treatment (P = 0.17). During lidocaine treatment, 27.7% of patients experienced a positive outcome versus 14.9% during the placebo phase (P = 0.073). There were no significant differences between treatments for secondary outcomes, although a carryover effect on pain pressure threshold was observed for the lidocaine phase (P = 0.015). A total of 27.5% of patients in the lidocaine group and 20.5% in the placebo group experienced minor reactions, the most common of which was pruritis (P = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

The differences favoring lidocaine were small and nonsignificant, but the trend toward superiority of lidocaine suggests more aggressive phenotyping and applying formulations with greater penetrance may provide clinically meaningful benefit.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

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.

The Roles of Endogenous Opioids in Placebo and Nocebo Effects: From Pain to Performance to Prozac

Placebo and nocebo effects have been well documented for nearly two centuries. However, research has only relatively recently begun to explicate the neurobiological underpinnings of these phenomena. Similarly, research on the broader social implications of placebo/nocebo effects, especially within healthcare delivery settings, is in a nascent stage. Biological and psychosocial outcomes of placebo/nocebo effects are of equal relevance. A common pathway for such outcomes is the endogenous opioid system. This chapter describes the history of placebo/nocebo in medicine; delineates the current state of the literature related to placebo/nocebo in relation to pain modulation; summarizes research findings related to human performance in sports and exercise; discusses the implications of placebo/nocebo effects among diverse patient populations; and describes placebo/nocebo influences in research related to psychopharmacology, including the relevance of endogenous opioids to new lines of research on antidepressant pharmacotherapies.

Temperature-sensitive multifunctional intelligent responsive hydrogel based on carboxymethyl agarose and N-isopropylacrylamide: Controlled drug release and accelerated wound healing

Wound healing remains challenging due to posttraumatic pain. At present, most wound dressings ignore the importance of wound pain. In this study, a temperature-sensitive multifunctional intelligent hydrogel patch (CPAG) containing lidocaine has developed for wound healing. CPAG hydrogel was prepared by grafting N-isopropylacrylamide and acrylamide onto carboxymethyl agarose (CMA) modified by agarose and encapsulating gallic acid and lidocaine. FTIR, 1H NMR spectroscopy, SEM and rheology were used to investigate its structure and temperature-sensitive properties. The contraction force generated by the temperature response characteristics of CPAG at 30 °C can accelerate wound healing. In vitro release assays demonstrated that CPAG directly controlled the same amount of lidocaine release at different temperatures through the competition between polymer-polymer and polymer-water interactions. In addition, MTT, H&E staining and stimulation test further proved its biological safety. The pain behavior study showed that the pain inhibition rates of the lidocaine cataplasms and LID@CPAG were 51.16 % and 67.83 %, respectively. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown that compared with the blank group, the bleeding volume of LID@CPAG decreased by 54.3 %, and the wound healing rate reached 97 %. CPAG hydrogel can play a comprehensive therapeutic role in accelerating wound closure by controlling drug release, analgesia, antioxidation and hemostasis.

A humanized chemogenetic system inhibits murine pain-related behavior and hyperactivity in human sensory neurons

Hyperexcitability in sensory neurons is known to underlie many of the maladaptive changes associated with persistent pain. Chemogenetics has shown promise as a means to suppress such excitability, yet chemogenetic approaches suitable for human applications are needed. PSAM4-GlyR is a modular system based on the human α7 nicotinic acetylcholine and glycine receptors, which responds to inert chemical ligands and the clinically approved drug varenicline. Here, we demonstrated the efficacy of this channel in silencing both mouse and human sensory neurons by the activation of large shunting conductances after agonist administration. Virally mediated expression of PSAM4-GlyR in mouse sensory neurons produced behavioral hyposensitivity upon agonist administration, which was recovered upon agonist washout. Stable expression of the channel led to similar reversible suppression of pain-related behavior even after 10 months of viral delivery. Mechanical and spontaneous pain readouts were also ameliorated by PSAM4-GlyR activation in acute and joint pain inflammation mouse models. Furthermore, suppression of mechanical hypersensitivity generated by a spared nerve injury model of neuropathic pain was also observed upon activation of the channel. Effective silencing of behavioral hypersensitivity was reproduced in a human model of hyperexcitability and clinical pain: PSAM4-GlyR activation decreased the excitability of human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived sensory neurons and spontaneous activity due to a gain-of-function NaV1.7 mutation causing inherited erythromelalgia. Our results demonstrate the contribution of sensory neuron hyperexcitability to neuropathic pain and the translational potential of an effective, stable, and reversible humanized chemogenetic system for the treatment of pain.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Analgesic Treatment Approach for Postherpetic Neuralgia: A Narrative Review

Post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) is an entity derived from peripheral nerve damage that occurs during the reactivation of the Varicella Zoster Virus (VZV), which manifests itself through pain with neuropathic characteristics. This can prove to be very difficult to manage in the chronic stages of disease reappearance. There currently exists a multitude of treatment alternatives for PHN, however, prevention through the early initiation of antiviral regimens is vital. There are various pharmacological options available, but it is important to individualize each patient to maximize efficacy and minimize adverse effects. Interventional procedures have become a cornerstone in difficult-to-manage cases, and have shown promising outcomes when used in a multimodal approach by experienced specialists. It is necessary to make an objective diagnosis of PHN and start early treatment. Additionally there is current evidence that vouches for interventional therapies as well as individualization, with a clear establishment of therapeutic objectives according to the needs of each patient.

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.

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.

An Update On Proficiency of Voltage-gated Ion Channel Blockers in the Treatment of Inflammation-associated Diseases

Inflammation is the body's mechanism to trigger the immune system, thereby preventing bacteria and viruses from manifesting their toxic effect. Inflammation plays a vital role in regulating inflammatory mediator levels to initiate the wound healing process depending on the nature of the stimuli. This process occurs due to chemical release from white blood cells by elevating blood flow to the site of action, leading to redness and increased body temperature. Currently, there are numerous Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) available, but these drugs are reported with adverse effects such as gastric bleeding, progressive kidney damage, and increased risk of heart attacks when prolonged use. For such instances, alternative options need to be adopted. The introduction of voltage-gated ion channel blockers can be a substantial alternative to mask the side effects of these currently available drugs. Chronic inflammatory disorders such as rheumatoid and osteoarthritis, cancer and migraine, etc., can cause dreadful pain, which is often debilitating for the patient. The underlying mechanism for both acute and chronic inflammation involves various complex receptors, different types of cells, receptors, and proteins. The working of voltage-gated sodium and calcium channels is closely linked to both inflammatory and neuropathic pain. Certain drugs such as carbamazepine and gabapentin, which are ion channel blockers, have greater pharmacotherapeutic activity for sodium and calcium channel blockers for the treatment of chronic inflammatory pain states. This review intends to provide brief information on the mechanism of action, latest clinical trials, and applications of these blockers in treating inflammatory conditions.

Dissecting central post-stroke pain: a controlled symptom-psychophysical characterization

Central post-stroke pain affects up to 12% of stroke survivors and is notoriously refractory to treatment. However, stroke patients often suffer from other types of pain of non-neuropathic nature (musculoskeletal, inflammatory, complex regional) and no head-to-head comparison of their respective clinical and somatosensory profiles has been performed so far. We compared 39 patients with definite central neuropathic post-stroke pain with two matched control groups: 32 patients with exclusively non-neuropathic pain developed after stroke and 31 stroke patients not complaining of pain. Patients underwent deep phenotyping via a comprehensive assessment including clinical exam, questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing to dissect central post-stroke pain from chronic pain in general and stroke. While central post-stroke pain was mostly located in the face and limbs, non-neuropathic pain was predominantly axial and located in neck, shoulders and knees (P < 0.05). Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory clusters burning (82.1%, n = 32, P < 0.001), tingling (66.7%, n = 26, P < 0.001) and evoked by cold (64.1%, n = 25, P < 0.001) occurred more frequently in central post-stroke pain. Hyperpathia, thermal and mechanical allodynia also occurred more commonly in this group (P < 0.001), which also presented higher levels of deafferentation (P < 0.012) with more asymmetric cold and warm detection thresholds compared with controls. In particular, cold hypoesthesia (considered when the threshold of the affected side was <41% of the contralateral threshold) odds ratio (OR) was 12 (95% CI: 3.8-41.6) for neuropathic pain. Additionally, cold detection threshold/warm detection threshold ratio correlated with the presence of neuropathic pain (ρ = -0.4, P < 0.001). Correlations were found between specific neuropathic pain symptom clusters and quantitative sensory testing: paroxysmal pain with cold (ρ = -0.4; P = 0.008) and heat pain thresholds (ρ = 0.5; P = 0.003), burning pain with mechanical detection (ρ = -0.4; P = 0.015) and mechanical pain thresholds (ρ = -0.4, P < 0.013), evoked pain with mechanical pain threshold (ρ = -0.3; P = 0.047). Logistic regression showed that the combination of cold hypoesthesia on quantitative sensory testing, the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, and the allodynia intensity on bedside examination explained 77% of the occurrence of neuropathic pain. These findings provide insights into the clinical-psychophysics relationships in central post-stroke pain and may assist more precise distinction of neuropathic from non-neuropathic post-stroke pain in clinical practice and in future trials.

Disentangling 'sciatica' to understand and characterise somatosensory profiles and potential pain mechanisms

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to investigate if patients with lumbar radicular pain only and those with combined lumbar radicular pain + radiculopathy differ in their somatosensory profiles and pain experiences.

METHODS

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) was performed in 26 patients (mean age 47 ± 10 years, 10 females) with unilateral leg pain in the L5 or S1 distribution in their main pain area (MPA) and contralateral mirror side, in the relevant foot dermatome on the symptomatic side and in the hand dorsum. Pain experience was captured on the painDETECT.

RESULTS

Eight patients presented with lumbar radicular pain only and 18 patients with combined radicular pain + radiculopathy. Patients with radicular pain only demonstrated widespread loss of function (mechanical detection) bilaterally in the MPA (p<0.003) and hand (p=0.002), increased heat sensitivity in both legs (p<0.019) and cold/heat sensitivity in the hand (p<0.024). QST measurements in the dermatome did not differ compared to HCs and patients with radiculopathy. Patients with lumbar radiculopathy were characterised by a localised loss of function in the symptomatic leg in the MPA (warm, mechanical, vibration detection, mechanical pain threshold, mechanical pain sensitivity p<0.031) and dermatome (mechanical, vibration detection p<0.001), consistent with a nerve root lesion. Pain descriptors did not differ between the two groups with the exception of numbness (p<0.001). Patients with radicular pain did not report symptoms of numbness, while 78% of patients with radiculopathy did.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinct differences in somatosensory profiles and pain experiences were demonstrated for each patient group, suggesting differing underlying pain mechanisms.

Neuropathic agents in the management of pruritus in burn injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

Pruritus is a common and often distressing complication after a burn injury. The purpose of this review is to explore the efficacy of drugs classically used to treat neuropathic pain in the management of pruritus after burn injury.

Methods

A systematic literature search of medical databases was conducted to find studies investigating drugs listed in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline (CG173, "neuropathic pain in adults") for the management of pruritus after burn injury in patients of any age. Controlled studies were stratified by the drug class studied and their risk of bias before conducting meta-analysis. A narrative review of case series or observational studies was presented. Severity of pruritus at any time point, with all quantitative and qualitative measures, was included.

Results

Fifteen studies were included in the final analysis, 10 investigated the use of gabapentinoids, 4 studied doxepin, and 1 local anesthetic agents. Meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated that the use of gabapentinoids was associated with an improvement in mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) 0-10 scores of 2.96 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.20 to 4.73, p<0.001) when compared with placebo or antihistamine. A meta-analysis of four RCTs investigating topical doxepin showed an improvement in mean VAS scores of 1.82 (95% CI 0.55 to 3.09, p<0.001). However, when excluding two studies found to be at high risk of bias, no such improvement was found (-0.32, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.99, p=0.83).

Conclusion

This study suggests that gabapentinoids are beneficial in the management of burn-related pruritus. There is a lack of evidence to suggest that doxepin is an effective treatment. Topical local anesthetic agents may be safe and beneficial, but studies are scarce.

Level of evidence

Systematic review, level II.

Topical Lidocaine for Chronic Pain Treatment

Topical lidocaine is widely used in current practice for a variety of pain conditions. This literature review shows that its limited absorption and relative lack of systemic adverse events are an attractive analgesic option for a number of vulnerable patients. Topical lidocaine has been approved by health authorities for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia in a number of countries, and studies present some degree of evidence of its efficacy and safety in postsurgical pain, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic lower back pain and osteoarthritis. Topical lidocaine may be a great alternative alone or in addition to systemic drugs and non-pharmacological approaches for an optimized pain management and in multimodal analgesia.

Bedside testing for precision pain medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, the identification of therapy responders has become an increasing focus of pain research. On the basis of laboratory quantitative sensory testing, subgroups of patients were identified, which have been shown to predict treatment response. However, the high cost and time expenditure limits the use of these lab-QST protocols in clinical practice and large clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, different bedside testing protocols were developed as easy-to-use alternative for lab-QST. In addition, patients can be subgrouped based on their symptoms by use of patient-reported outcome measures. First results suggest that these approaches can be used to stratify patients into pathophysiological-plausible subgroups predictive for treatment response.

SUMMARY

This review presents recently developed bedside approaches that can be implemented as stratification tools in future clinical trials to realize individualized pain medicine. Being complementary rather than replaceable, future studies should combine questionnaires and sensory testing and apply them prospectively in large clinical trials.

Neuropathic pain: Spotlighting anatomy, experimental models, mechanisms, and therapeutic aspects

The International Association for the Study of Pain defines neuropathic pain as "pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system". The associated changes can be observed in the peripheral as well as the central nervous system. The available literature discusses a wide variety of causes as predisposing for the development and amplification of neuropathic pain. Further, key interactions within sensory pathways have been discovered, but no common molecular mechanism leading to neuropathic pain has been identified until now. In the first part of this review, the pain mediating lateral spinothalamic tract is described. Different in vivo models are presented that allow studying trauma-, chemotherapy-, virus-, and diabetes-induced neuropathic pain in rodents. We furthermore discuss approaches to assess neuropathic pain in these models. Second, the current knowledge about cellular and molecular mechanisms suggested to underlie the development of neuropathic pain is presented and discussed. A summary of established therapies that are already applied in the clinic and novel, promising approaches closes the paper. In conclusion, the established animal models are able to emulate the diversity of neuropathic pain observed in the clinics. However, the assessment of neuropathic pain in the presented in vivo models should be improved. The determination of common molecular markers with suitable in vitro models would simplify the assessment of neuropathic pain in vivo. This would furthermore provide insights into common molecular mechanisms of the disease and establish a basis to search for satisfying therapeutic approaches.

The predictive value of quantitative sensory testing: a systematic review on chronic postoperative pain and the analgesic effect of pharmacological therapies in patients with chronic pain

Studies have suggested that quantitative sensory testing (QST) might hold a predictive value for the development of chronic postoperative pain and the response to pharmacological interventions. This review systematically summarizes the current evidence on the predictive value of QST for chronic postoperative pain and the effect of pharmacological interventions. The main outcome measures were posttreatment pain intensity, pain relief, presence of moderate-to-severe postoperative pain, responders of 30% and 50% pain relief, or validated questionnaires on pain and disability. A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE yielded 25 studies on surgical interventions and 11 on pharmacological interventions. Seventeen surgical and 11 pharmacological studies reported an association between preoperative or pretreatment QST and chronic postoperative pain or analgesic effect. The most commonly assessed QST modalities were pressure stimuli (17 studies), temporal summation of pain (TSP, 14 studies), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM, 16 studies). Of those, the dynamic QST parameters TSP (50%) and CPM (44%) were most frequently associated with chronic postoperative pain and analgesic effects. A large heterogeneity in methods for assessing TSP (n = 4) and CPM (n = 7) was found. Overall, most studies demonstrated low-to-moderate levels of risk of bias in study design, attrition, prognostic factors, outcome, and statistical analyses. This systematic review demonstrates that TSP and CPM show the most consistent predictive values for chronic postoperative pain and analgesic effect, but the heterogeneous methodologies reduce the generalizability and hence call for methodological guidelines.

Pharmacotherapeutic Options for Managing Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Despite an increasing number of available therapies, the treatment of neuropathic pain remains a major issue. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicate that only a minority of patients with neuropathic pain have an adequate response to pharmacological treatment and that most drugs have dose-limiting side effects. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials published in the last five years. We searched for relevant papers within PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Clinical Trials database (ClinicalTrials.gov). Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion, data extraction, and bias assessment. We identified 39 randomised controlled trials and included 16 in the meta-analysis. Trial outcomes were generally modest even for first-line drugs such as tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, and gabapentinoids. Many drugs acting on new pain targets are currently under development. Clinical data are currently available for sodium channel isoform-specific antagonists, anti-nerve growth factor molecules, and fatty acid amide hydrolase inhibitors.

Small Fiber Neuropathy in the Elderly

Small fiber neuropathy is common and prevalent in the elderly. The disease can be associated with many medical conditions. It often has a negative impact on quality of life due to painful paresthesia, dizziness, and sedative side effects of pain medications. Skin biopsy is the gold standard diagnostic test. Screening for associated conditions is important, because etiology-specific treatment can slow down disease progression and ameliorate symptoms. Adequate pain control can be challenging due to safety and tolerability of pain medications in the elderly. Treatment should be individualized with the goals of controlling underlying causes, alleviating pain, and optimizing daily function.

Assessment of Pain Modulatory and Somatosensory Profiles in Chronic Tension-Type Headache Patients

Objective

The aim of this study was to thoroughly phenotype a group of chronic tension-type headache (CTTH) patients.

Methods

Fifteen CTTH patients diagnosed according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders–3 and 15 healthy controls were included in this study. Furthermore, 70 healthy controls were included to establish normative values. Quantitative sensory testing (QST), including temporal summation of pain (TSP), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and psychological and sleep variables, was assessed in a single session. TSP and CPM were then combined to build pain modulation profiles (PMP) for each individual.

Results

No difference was found between groups for PMP, TSP, and CPM. However, 10 CTTH patients showed a pronociceptive PMP, with 8 related to a deficient CPM and 2 to both a deficient CPM and increased TSP. Increased cold detection thresholds were the most common sensory disturbance found in CTTH patients. Significant differences were seen between groups for pain catastrophizing, depression, and sleep quality although not all patient’s scores were above the clinically meaningful cutoffs.

Conclusions

In summary, CTTH patients presented with different PMP. These PMP may be related to increased TSP, deficient CPM, alterations in thermal detection that may be related to autonomic dysregulation, or a combination of all three. Overall, this suggests that due to their heterogeneous pathophysiology, CTTH patients should be managed according to their underlying pathophysiology and not with a one-size-fits-all approach.

Greater small nerve fibre damage in the skin and cornea of type 1 diabetic patients with painful compared to painless diabetic neuropathy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Damage to small nociceptive fibres may contribute to painful diabetic neuropathy. We aimed to compare large and small nerve fibre measurements together with skin biopsy and corneal confocal microscopy in patients with type 1 diabetes and painful or painless diabetic neuropathy.

METHODS

We have assessed the McGill pain questionnaire, neuropathy disability score, vibration perception threshold, warm and cold sensation thresholds, electrophysiology, corneal confocal microscopy and skin biopsy in participants with type 1 diabetes and painful (n = 41) or painless (n = 50) diabetic neuropathy and control subjects (n = 50).

RESULTS

The duration of diabetes, body mass index, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure and lipid profile did not differ between subjects with painful and painless neuropathy. Neuropathy disability score and vibration perception threshold were higher and sural nerve conduction velocity was lower, but sural nerve amplitude, peroneal nerve amplitude and conduction velocity and cold and warm sensation thresholds did not differ between patients with painful compared to painless diabetic neuropathy. However, intraepidermal nerve fibre density, corneal nerve fibre density, corneal nerve branch density and corneal nerve fibre length were significantly lower in subjects with painful compared to painless diabetic neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of more severe neuropathy, particularly small fibre damage in the skin and cornea, of patients with painful compared to painless diabetic neuropathy.

Pharmacological Modulation of Rate-Dependent Depression of the Spinal H-Reflex Predicts Therapeutic Efficacy against Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Impaired rate-dependent depression (RDD) of the spinal H-reflex occurs in diabetic rodents and a sub-set of patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. RDD is unaffected in animal models of painful neuropathy associated with peripheral pain mechanisms and diabetic patients with painless neuropathy, suggesting RDD could serve as a biomarker for individuals in whom spinal disinhibition contributes to painful neuropathy and help identify therapies that target impaired spinal inhibitory function. The spinal pharmacology of RDD was investigated in normal rats and rats after 4 and 8 weeks of streptozotocin-induced diabetes. In normal rats, dependence of RDD on spinal GABAergic inhibitory function encompassed both GABA_A and GABA_B receptor sub-types. The time-dependent emergence of impaired RDD in diabetic rats was preceded by depletion of potassium-chloride co-transporter 2 (KCC2) protein in the dorsal, but not ventral, spinal cord and by dysfunction of GABA_A receptor-mediated inhibition. GABA_B receptor-mediated spinal inhibition remained functional and initially compensated for loss of GABA_A receptor-mediated inhibition. Administration of the GABA_B receptor agonist baclofen restored RDD and alleviated indices of neuropathic pain in diabetic rats, as did spinal delivery of the carbonic anhydrase inhibitor acetazolamide. Pharmacological manipulation of RDD can be used to identify potential therapies that act against neuropathic pain arising from spinal disinhibition.

Design and conduct of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials

The purpose of this article is to provide readers with a basis for understanding the emerging science of clinical trials and to provide a set of practical, evidence-based suggestions for designing and executing confirmatory clinical trials in a manner that minimizes measurement error. The most important step in creating a mindset of quality clinical research is to abandon the antiquated concept that clinical trials are a method for capturing data from clinical practice and shifting to a concept of the clinical trial as a measurement system, consisting of an interconnected set of processes, each of which must be in calibration for the trial to generate an accurate and reliable estimate of the efficacy (and safety) of a given treatment. The status quo of inaccurate, unreliable, and protracted clinical trials is unacceptable and unsustainable. This article gathers aspects of study design and conduct under a single broad umbrella of techniques available to improve the accuracy and reliability of confirmatory clinical trials across traditional domain boundaries.

The Safety of Medications used to Treat Peripheral Neuropathic Pain, Part 2 (Opioids, Cannabinoids and Other Drugs): review of Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral neuropathic pain is a disabling condition for patients and a challenge for physicians. Although many drugs have been assessed in scientific studies, few have demonstrated clear clinical efficacy against neuropathic pain. Moreover, the paucity of data regarding their safety raises the question of the benefit-risk ratio when used in patients experiencing peripheral neuropathies.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a review of double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials to assess the safety of medications used to treat peripheral neuropathic pain. This second review was focused on opioids, cannabinoids, and other medications. The aim was to provide an overview of the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (≥10%) and the serious adverse effects described in clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Opioids and cannabinoids had significantly more TEAEs than placebos. Locally administered analgesics, such as capsaicin, lidocaine, botulinum toxin A seemed to have the most acceptable safety with only local adverse effects. The results for NMDA antagonists were inconclusive since no safety report was available. Less than half of the studies included presented a good description of TEAEs that included a statistical comparison versus a placebo group. Major methodological improvements must be made to ameliorate the assessment of medication safety in future clinical trials.

Traitements pharmacologiques et non pharmacologiques de la douleur neuropathique : une synthèse des recommandations françaises

Les douleurs neuropathiques (DN) restent très difficiles à soulager. Plusieurs recommandations ont été proposées au cours de ces dernières années, mais aucune n’a pris en compte à ce jour l’ensemble des approches thérapeutiques disponibles. Nous avons réalisé une revue systématique portant sur toutes les études concernant le traitement des DN périphériques et centrales de l’adulte et de l’enfant, publiées jusqu’en janvier 2018 et avons évalué la qualité des études et le niveau de preuve des traitements au moyen du système GRADE. Les principaux critères d’inclusion étaient l’existence d’une DN chronique (≥ 3 mois), une méthodologie contrôlée et randomisée, un suivi supérieur ou égal à trois semaines, un nombre de patients supérieur ou égal à dix par groupe et une évaluation en double insu pour les traitements pharmacologiques. Sur la base du GRADE, nous recommandons en première intention les antidépresseurs inhibiteurs mixtes de recapture des monoamines (duloxétine et venlafaxine), les antidépresseurs tricycliques, la gabapentine pour toute DN, et les emplâtres de lidocaïne 5 % et la stimulation électrique transcutanée pour les DN périphériques localisées. Nous recommandons en deuxième intention la prégabaline, le tramadol (avec les précautions d’emploi afférentes aux opioïdes) et certaines associations pharmacologiques (antidépresseurs et gabapentine ou prégabaline) pour toute DN, et les patchs de haute concentration de capsaïcine (8 %) et la toxine botulique de type A (en milieu spécialisé) pour les DN périphériques localisées. Nous recommandons en troisième intention la stimulation magnétique transcrânienne répétitive à haute fréquence du cortex moteur (en milieu spécialisé) et les opioïdes forts (en l’absence d’alternative et en respectant les précautions d’emploi afférentes aux opioïdes) pour toute douleur neuropathique, et la stimulation médullaire pour les douleurs radiculaires chroniques postchirurgicales et la polyneuropathie diabétique douloureuse. La psychothérapie (thérapie cognitivocomportementale et thérapie de pleine conscience) peut être recommandée en deuxième intention en association avec les traitements précédents.

Reliability and Validity of the Boston Bedside Quantitative Sensory Testing Battery for Neuropathic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies suggest that sensory phenotyping may provide critical information for the diagnosis and management of patients with chronic neuropathic pain (NP). However, many formal quantitative sensory testing (QST) paradigms require expensive equipment, a dedicated location, and substantial time commitments on the part of patient and examiner, highlighting the need for a convenient and portable "bedside" QST battery. We developed and tested a bedside QST battery in a sample of patients with chronic NP.

METHODS

Participants (N = 51) attended two in-person visits over approximately two weeks, during which they underwent QST using both laboratory-based equipment and simple, easily accessible bedside tools. Participants also completed questionnaires about their daily pain and NP symptoms.

RESULTS

Test-retest reliability estimates were highly statistically significant and did not differ between bedside (mean r = 0.60) and laboratory-based (mean r = 0.72) QST. Bedside QST variables and corresponding laboratory-based QST variables were highly correlated, suggesting adequate criterion validity for the bedside tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from the present study may have important implications for the sensory phenotyping and subsequent management of patients with chronic NP. Implementation of a protocol that uses inexpensive, portable, and convenient tools may allow for the application of QST in variety of clinical settings and advance NP research.

State-of-the-art pharmacotherapy for diabetic neuropathy

INTRODUCTION

The global epidemic of diabetes has led to an epidemic of diabetes complications. Diabetic neuropathy is the most common microvascular complication, of which diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and autonomic neuropathy (AN) are the most prevalent, affecting ~50% of patients. DPN results in pain with a poor quality of life and a loss of sensation with an increased risk of foot ulceration. Autonomic neuropathy can cause significant morbidity in a minority and is associated with increased mortality. The cornerstone of treatment to prevent or limit the progression of DPN/AN is multifactorial risk factor modification including treatment of glycemia, lipids and blood pressure. Whilst, there are no FDA-approved disease-modifying therapies, there are a number of therapies to relieve symptoms in DPN and AN.

AREAS COVERED

The authors discuss current approved therapies for painful diabetic neuropathy and autonomic neuropathy. They also address the potential role of improving risk factors to limit the development and progression of diabetic neuropathy and new pathogenetic and pain-relieving treatments.

EXPERT OPINION

The FDA-approved Pregabalin and Duloxetine over 25 years ago and Tapentadol, 6 years ago for painful diabetic neuropathy. There are currently no FDA-approved disease-modifying treatments for diabetic neuropathy which has been attributed to inappropriate models of the disease with limited translational capacity and major limitations of trial designs and endpoints in clinical trials.

Determinants of Treatment Response in Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Combined Deep Sensory Phenotyping and Multimodal Brain MRI Study

Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is difficult to manage, as treatment response is often varied. The primary aim of this study was to examine differences in pain phenotypes between responders and nonresponders to intravenous lidocaine treatment using quantitative sensory testing. The secondary aim was to explore differences in brain structure and functional connectivity with treatment response. Forty-five consecutive patients who received intravenous lidocaine treatment for painful DPN were screened. Twenty-nine patients who met the eligibility criteria (responders, n = 14, and nonresponders, n = 15) and 26 healthy control subjects underwent detailed sensory profiling. Subjects also underwent multimodal brain MRI. A greater proportion of patients with the irritable (IR) nociceptor phenotype were responders to intravenous lidocaine treatment compared with nonresponders. The odds ratio of responding to intravenous lidocaine was 8.67 times greater (95% CI 1.4-53.8) for the IR nociceptor phenotype. Responders to intravenous lidocaine also had significantly greater mean primary somatosensory cortex cortical volume and functional connectivity between the insula cortex and the corticolimbic circuitry. This study provides preliminary evidence for a mechanism-based approach for individualizing therapy in patients with painful DPN.

Can self-reported pain characteristics and bedside test be used for the assessment of pain mechanisms? An analysis of results of neuropathic pain questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing

Hyperalgesia and allodynia are frequent in neuropathic pain. Some pain questionnaires such as the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) and the Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) include self-assessment or bedside testing of hyperalgesia/allodynia. The aim of this study was to determine to what extent LANSS and NPS data are congruent with findings on quantitative sensory testing (QST). Self-reported presence of dynamic mechanical allodynia (DMA) and descriptors of hot, cold, or deep ongoing pain (the NPS and LANSS) as well as bedside findings of mechanical allodynia (LANSS) were compared with signs of DMA and thermal hyperalgesia on QST in 617 patients with neuropathic pain. Self-reported abnormal skin sensitivity (LANSS) showed a moderate concordance with DMA during bedside test (67.9%, κ = 0.391) or QST (52.8%, κ = 0.165). Receiver operating curve analysis for self-reported DMA yielded similar area-under-the-curve values for the LANSS (0.65, confidence interval: 0.59%-0.97%) and NPS (0.71, confidence interval: 0.66%-0.75%) with high sensitivity but low specificity. Self-reported deep pain intensity was higher in patients with blunt pressure hyperalgesia, but not in patients with DMA or thermal hyperalgesia. No correlations were observed between self-reported hot or cold pain quality and thermal hyperalgesia on QST. Self-reported abnormal skin sensitivity has a high sensitivity to identify patients with DMA, but its low specificity indicates that many patients mean something other than DMA when reporting this symptom. Self-reported deep pain is related to deep-tissue hypersensitivity, but thermal qualities of ongoing pain are not related to thermal hyperalgesia. Questionnaires mostly evaluate the ongoing pain experience, whereas QST mirrors sensory functions. Therefore, both methods are complementary for pain assessment.

Neuropathic Pain: From Mechanisms to Treatment

Neuropathic pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system is a common chronic pain condition with major impact on quality of life. Examples include trigeminal neuralgia, painful polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, and central poststroke pain. Most patients complain of an ongoing or intermittent spontaneous pain of, for example, burning, pricking, squeezing quality, which may be accompanied by evoked pain, particular to light touch and cold. Ectopic activity in, for example, nerve-end neuroma, compressed nerves or nerve roots, dorsal root ganglia, and the thalamus may in different conditions underlie the spontaneous pain. Evoked pain may spread to neighboring areas, and the underlying pathophysiology involves peripheral and central sensitization. Maladaptive structural changes and a number of cell-cell interactions and molecular signaling underlie the sensitization of nociceptive pathways. These include alteration in ion channels, activation of immune cells, glial-derived mediators, and epigenetic regulation. The major classes of therapeutics include drugs acting on α₂δ subunits of calcium channels, sodium channels, and descending modulatory inhibitory pathways.

Sensory profiles in women with neuropathic pain after breast cancer surgery

Purpose

We performed a detailed analysis of sensory function in patients with chronic post-surgical neuropathic pain (NP) after breast cancer treatments by quantitative sensory testing (QST) with DFNS (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain) protocol and bed side examination (BE). The nature of sensory changes in peripheral NP may reflect distinct pathophysiological backgrounds that can guide the treatment choices. NP with sensory gain (i.e., hyperesthesia, hyperalgesia, allodynia) has been shown to respond to Na⁺-channel blockers (e.g., oxcarbazepine).

Methods

104 patients with at least “probable” NP in the surgical area were included. All patients had been treated for breast cancer 4–9 years ago and the handling of the intercostobrachial nerve (ICBN) was verified by the surgeon. QST was conducted at the site of NP in the surgical or nearby area and the corresponding contralateral area. BE covered the upper body and sensory abnormalities were marked on body maps and digitalized for area calculation. The outcomes of BE and QST were compared to assess the value of QST in the sensory examination of this patient group.

Results

Loss of function in both small and large fibers was a prominent feature in QST in the area of post-surgical NP. QST profiles did not differ between spared and resected ICBN. In BE, hypoesthesia on multiple modalities was highly prevalent. The presence of sensory gain in BE was associated with more intense pain.

Conclusions

Extensive sensory loss is characteristic for chronic post-surgical NP several years after treatment for breast cancer. These patients are unlikely to respond to Na⁺-channel blockers.

Sensory bedside testing: a simple stratification approach for sensory phenotyping

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

Introduction:

Stratification of patients according to the individual sensory phenotype has been suggested a promising method to identify responders for pain treatment. However, many state-of-the-art sensory testing procedures are expensive or time-consuming.

Objectives:

Therefore, this study aimed to present a selection of easy-to-use bedside devices.

Methods:

In total, 73 patients (39 m/34 f) and 20 controls (11 m/9 f) received a standardized laboratory quantitative sensory testing (QST) and a bedside-QST. In addition, 50 patients were tested by a group of nonexperienced investigators to address the impact of training. The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver-operating characteristics were analyzed for each bedside-QST parameter as compared to laboratory QST. Furthermore, the patients' individual sensory phenotype (ie, cluster) was determined using laboratory QST, to select bedside-QST parameters most indicative for a correct cluster allocation.

Results:

The bedside-QST parameters “loss of cold perception to 22°C metal,” “hypersensitivity towards 45°C metal,” “loss of tactile perception to Q-tip and 0.7 mm CMS hair,” as well as “the allodynia sum score” indicated good sensitivity and specificity (ie, ≳70%). Results of interrater variability indicated that training is necessary for individual parameters (ie, CMS 0.7). For the cluster assessment, the respective bedside quantitative sensory testing (QST) parameter combination indicated the following agreements as compared to laboratory QST stratification: excellent for “sensory loss” (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.91), good for “thermal hyperalgesia” (AUC = 0.83), and fair for “mechanical hyperalgesia” (AUC = 0.75).

Conclusion:

This study presents a selection of bedside parameters to identify the individual sensory phenotype as cost and time efficient as possible.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for neuropathic pain: Systematic review and French recommendations

Neuropathic pain remains a significant unmet medical need. Several recommendations have recently been proposed concerning pharmacotherapy, neurostimulation techniques and interventional management, but no comprehensive guideline encompassing all these treatments has yet been issued. We performed a systematic review of pharmacotherapy, neurostimulation, surgery, psychotherapies and other types of therapy for peripheral or central neuropathic pain, based on studies published in peer-reviewed journals before January 2018. The main inclusion criteria were chronic neuropathic pain for at least three months, a randomized controlled methodology, at least three weeks of follow-up, at least 10 patients per group, and a double-blind design for drug therapy. Based on the GRADE system, we provide weak-to-strong recommendations for use and proposal as a first-line treatment for SNRIs (duloxetine and venlafaxine), gabapentin and tricyclic antidepressants and, for topical lidocaine and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation specifically for peripheral neuropathic pain; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as a second-line treatment for pregabalin, tramadol, combination therapy (antidepressant combined with gabapentinoids), and for high-concentration capsaicin patches and botulinum toxin A specifically for peripheral neuropathic pain; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as a third-line treatment for high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex, spinal cord stimulation (failed back surgery syndrome and painful diabetic polyneuropathy) and strong opioids (in the absence of an alternative). Psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness) is recommended as a second-line therapy, as an add-on to other therapies. An algorithm encompassing all the recommended treatments is proposed.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster vs. pregabalin

Objective: Neuropathic pain prevalence is estimated between 7% and 10% of the population. International guidelines recommend a variety of drugs at different therapy lines for pain relief. However, side effect profiles, for example, prompted the UK government recently to classify pregabalin and gabapentin as class C drugs. Lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (LMP) might be a safer alternative. A systematic review assessed how LMP and pregabalin compared in terms of efficacy and safety. The review focused on pain reduction, quality of life and adverse events in peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) i.e. post-herpetic neuralgia, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, post-surgical/trauma, or other PNP conditions.Methods: Electronic databases were searched as well as a number of other sources up to November 2018. Sensitive strategies were used, with no restriction by language or publication status. Two independent reviewers screened records and extracted data with consensus determining final decisions. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration 2011 checklist for RCTs. Full network meta-analysis was conducted to compare LMP to pregabalin 300/600 mg in terms of pain reduction, quality of life, as well as serious adverse events and selected adverse events. Trials with enriched enrolment design were excluded.Results: Searches retrieved 7,104 records. In total 111 references pertaining to 43 RCTs were included for data extraction. Bayesian network meta-analysis of several pain outcomes showed no clear difference in efficacy between treatments However, LMP was clearly advantageous in terms of dizziness and any adverse event vs. pregabalin 600 mg/day and discontinuations vs. pregabalin 300 mg/day or 600 mg/day, as well as being associated with improved quality of life (albeit in this case based on weak evidence).Conclusions: LMP was found to be similar to pregabalin in reducing pain in all populations but had a better adverse events profile.