Symptom-Based Treatment of Neuropathic Pain in Spinal Cord-Injured Patients: A Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial

Mechanisms and Therapeutic Prospects of Microglia-Astrocyte Interactions in Neuropathic Pain Following Spinal Cord Injury

Neuropathic pain is a prevalent and debilitating condition experienced by the majority of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). The complex pathophysiology of neuropathic pain, involving continuous activation of microglia and astrocytes, reactive gliosis, and altered neuronal plasticity, poses significant challenges for effective treatment. This review focuses on the pivotal roles of microglia and astrocytes, the two major glial cell types in the central nervous system, in the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain after SCI. We highlight the extensive bidirectional interactions between these cells, mediated by the release of inflammatory mediators, neurotransmitters, and neurotrophic factors, which contribute to the amplification of pain signaling. Understanding the microglia-astrocyte crosstalk and its impact on neuronal function is crucial for developing novel therapeutic strategies targeting neuropathic pain. In addition, this review discusses the fundamental biology, post-injury pain roles, and therapeutic prospects of microglia and astrocytes in neuropathic pain after SCI and elucidates the specific signaling pathways involved. We also speculated that the extracellular matrix (ECM) can affect the glial cells as well. Furthermore, we also mentioned potential targeted therapies, challenges, and progress in clinical trials, as well as new biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Finally, other relevant cell interactions in neuropathic pain and the role of glial cells in other neuropathic pain conditions have been discussed. This review serves as a comprehensive resource for further investigations into the microglia-astrocyte interaction and the detailed mechanisms of neuropathic pain after SCI, with the aim of improving therapeutic efficacy.

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

ABSTRACT

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

Experience from a single-center study on multimodal medication therapy for patients with complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Despite the application of various therapeutic methods, pain caused by complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is not sufficiently managed and often progresses to a chronic stage. For the systematic and effective treatment of CRPS, we developed an algorithm for multimodal medication therapy based on the established pathophysiology of CRPS to control CRPS-related pain.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we present the outcomes of our novel algorithm for multimodal medication therapy for patients with CRPS, consisting of three major components: multimodal oral medication, intravenous ketamine, and intravenous lidocaine therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated patients with CRPS who received multimodal therapy. Pain severity scores were evaluated using a numerical rating scale at four time points (P1, pain at initial consultation; P2, pain after oral medication; P3, pain after ketamine treatment; and P4, pain after lidocaine treatment). The effect of the multimodal medication therapy algorithm on pain management was evaluated at each time point.

RESULTS

In patients with CRPS, multimodal oral medication, intravenous ketamine, and intravenous lidocaine therapies led to significantly improved pain control (p< 0.05). Additionally, the combination of these three therapies (through the multimodal medication therapy algorithm) resulted in significant pain relief in patients with CRPS (p< 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our multimodal medication therapy algorithm effectively controlled pain in patients with CRPS. However, further prospective studies with large sample sizes and randomized controlled trials are needed for more accurate generalization.

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.

Symptom-based characteristics and treatment efficacy of neuropathic pain related to spinal disorders

BACKGROUND

Symptom-based therapeutic management is required for neuropathic pain (NeP) to achieve higher treatment efficacy. In spinal disorders, which have a high prevalence of NeP, neurological symptoms are classified into myelopathy, radiculopathy, and cauda equina syndrome. The characteristics of pain and the treatment efficacy for each of these symptoms require clarification.

METHODS

A retrospective patient-based outcome study was conducted in 265 outpatients with chronic NeP (≥3 months) related to spinal disorders. The patients were classified into three groups according to their neurological symptoms: spinal cord-related pain, radicular pain, and cauda equina syndrome. Data were obtained from patient-based questionnaires using the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) and the Brief Scale for Psychiatric Problems in Orthopaedic Patients (BS-POP), and from clinical information.

RESULTS

Most of the patients with NeP had a NPSI score >10 (moderate to severe pain) and 40% had psychiatric problems. The common subtype of NeP was spontaneous pain and paresthesia/dysesthesia in patients with radicular pain and cauda equina syndrome, whereas more severe paresthesia/dysesthesia was particularly prominent in patients with spinal cord-related pain. The pain reduction rate was significantly lower in these latter patients, especially in association with residual paresthesia/dysesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The characteristics and treatment efficacy of NeP in patients with spinal disorders varied according to neurological symptoms. Effective treatment was difficult, especially for paresthesia/dysesthesia in patients with spinal cord-related pain. These findings enhance the understanding of the underlying mechanisms of pain and could help in design of symptom-based therapeutic management.

Multidimensional pain phenotypes after Traumatic Brain Injury

More than 50% of individuals develop chronic pain following traumatic brain injury (TBI). Research suggests that a significant portion of post-TBI chronic pain conditions is neuropathic in nature, yet the relationship between neuropathic pain, psychological distress, and somatosensory function following TBI is not fully understood. This study evaluated neuropathic pain symptoms, psychological and somatosensory function, and psychosocial factors in individuals with TBI (TBI, N = 38). A two-step cluster analysis was used to identify phenotypes based on the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory and Beck's Anxiety Inventory scores. Phenotypes were then compared on pain characteristics, psychological and somatosensory function, and psychosocial factors. Our analyses resulted in two different neuropathic pain phenotypes: (1) Moderate neuropathic pain severity and anxiety scores (MNP-AS, N = 11); and (2) mild or no neuropathic pain symptoms and anxiety scores (LNP-AS, N = 27). Furthermore, the MNP-AS group exhibited greater depression, PTSD, pain severity, and affective distress scores than the LNP-AS group. In addition, thermal somatosensory function (difference between thermal pain and perception thresholds) was significantly lower in the MNP-AS compared to the LNP-AS group. Our findings suggest that neuropathic pain symptoms are relatively common after TBI and are not only associated with greater psychosocial distress but also with abnormal function of central pain processing pathways.

Symptom-based pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain related to spinal disorders: results from a patient-based assessment

Existing guidelines advocate an updated therapeutic algorithm for chronic neuropathic pain (NeP), but pharmacotherapeutic management should be individualized to pain phenotypes to achieve higher efficacy. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy of medications, based on NeP phenotypes, and to propose symptom-based pharmacotherapy. This retrospective study was enrolled 265 outpatients with chronic NeP related to spinal disorders. The patients were classified into three groups: spinal cord-related pain, radicular pain, and cauda equina syndrome. Data were obtained from patient-based questionnaires using Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) and the Brief Scale for Psychiatric Problems in Orthopaedic Patients, and from clinical information. The proportions of patients with ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% reduction in NPSI score for each pain subtype (spontaneous pain, paroxysmal pain, evoked pain, and paresthesia/dysesthesia) and drugs were evaluated. The pain reduction rate was significantly lower in patients with spinal cord-related pain, especially for paresthesia/dysesthesia. For spinal cord-related pain, duloxetine and neurotropin had insufficient analgesic effects, whereas mirogabalin was the most effective. Pregabalin or mirogabalin for radicular pain and duloxetine for cauda equina syndrome are recommended in cases of insufficient analgesic effects with neurotropin. The findings could contribute to better strategies for symptom-based pharmacotherapeutic management.

The CanPain SCI clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitation management of neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: 2021 update

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to update the 2016 version of the Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI).

SETTING

The guidelines are relevant for inpatient, outpatient and community SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada.

METHODS

The guidelines were updated in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. A Steering Committee and Working Group reviewed the relevant evidence on neuropathic pain management (encompassing screening and diagnosis, treatment and models of care) after SCI. The quality of evidence was scored using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A consensus process was followed to achieve agreement on recommendations and clinical considerations.

RESULTS

The working group identified and reviewed 46 additional relevant articles published since the last version of the guidelines. The panel agreed on 3 new screening and diagnosis recommendations and 8 new treatment recommendations. Two key changes to these treatment recommendations included the introduction of general treatment principles and a new treatment recommendation classification system. No new recommendations to model of care were made.

CONCLUSIONS

The CanPainSCI recommendations for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI should be used to inform practice.

Treatment of neuropathic pain

Background: Neuropathic pain presents a therapeutic challenge because patients cannot be relieved from it, even when all known medical options have been tried. Several treatment guidelines have been provided, and several pharmacotherapies have been proposed with non-pharmacological treatments. This study aimed to present the current pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments used to treat patients with neuropathic pain. Furthermore, several treatment guidelines for neuropathic pain are compared.Current Concepts: Tricyclic antidepressants, gabapentinoids, and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors are the first-line agents recommended by clinical guidelines in several countries. Tramadol and topical agents are recommended as second-line agents. Opioids and cannabinoids are recommended as third-line agents; cannabinoids are recommended by Canadian treatment guidelines. Combination therapy may be more effective because it results in synergistic pain-relieving effects, and the individual drug dose may be lower. Non-pharmacologic treatment is recommended as third-line or supplementary management because of the lack of evidence.Discussion and Conclusion: Several guidelines have recommended similar drugs; however, it is impossible to completely cure neuropathic pain. Therefore, therapeutic goals must be realistically discussed to improve patient compliance. In addition, additional studies based on pathophysiological mechanisms should be conducted to improve the management of neuropathic pain.

Guideline "diagnosis and non interventional therapy of neuropathic pain" of the German Society of Neurology (deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie)

2019 the DGN (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurology) published a new guideline on the diagnosis and non-interventional therapy of neuropathic pain of any etiology excluding trigeminal neuralgia and CRPS (complex regional pain syndrome). Neuropathic pain occurs after lesion or damage of the somatosensory system. Besides clinical examination several diagnostic procedures are recommended to assess the function of nociceptive A-delta and C-Fibers (skin biopsy, quantitative sensory testing, Laser-evoked potentials, Pain-evoked potentials, corneal confocal microscopy, axon reflex testing). First line treatment in neuropathic pain is pregabalin, gabapentin, duloxetine and amitriptyline. Second choice drugs are topical capsaicin and lidocaine, which can also be considered as primary treatment in focal neuropathic pain. Opioids are considered as third choice treatment. Botulinum toxin can be considered as a third choice drug for focal limited pain in specialized centers only. Carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine cannot be generally  recommended, but might be helpful in single cases. In Germany, cannabinoids can be prescribed, but only after approval of reimbursement. However, the use is not recommended, and can only be considered as off-label therapy within a multimodal therapy concept.

Multicenter cross-sectional study of the clinical features and types of treatment of spinal cord-related pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

We termed chronic neuropathic pain (NeP) in patients with diseases associated with spinal cord damage as "spinal cord-related pain syndrome". We conducted a survey of patients with the syndrome to assess the type and severity of NeP and its effect on QOL, and treatment modalities.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in 185 patients recruited from 15 medical institutions. We analyzed the questionnaires sent to clinicians (basic information, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, type and effectiveness of medications) and patients [modified Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) and short form (SF)-36 healthy survey].

RESULTS

The incidence of spinal cord-related pain syndrome was highest in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy, ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) and spinal cord injury. The number of patients with at-level pain was higher than those with below-level pain; dysesthesia/paresthesia, spontaneous and evoked pain types were mainly seen in patients with at-level pain and dysesthesia/paresthesia was common among those with below-level pain. NPSI score was higher than 10 in the majority of patients, and the subscore for dysesthesia/paresthesia was significantly the highest. The NPSI score was the highest in patients with severe hyperintense signal increase on MRI. The scores of all SF-36 sub-items were significantly lower than the national average. The majority of patients used non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs and gabapentin/pregabalin; the latter was significantly effective for allodynia, compared with other medications, regardless of the pain level.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with spinal cord-related pain syndrome suffered from severe NeP, which affected physical activity. The pain phenotype varied according to the level of the lesion and dysesthesia/paresthesia was the most intense. Compared with other medications, gabapentin/pregabalin was significantly effective especially for dysesthesia/paresthesia and evoked pain regardless of the pain level.

A Nationwide Survey of Spinal Cord-Related Pain Syndrome in Japan: Clinical Characteristics and Treatment

Introduction

In this study, we defined chronic neuropathic pain (NeP) in patients with diseases associated with spinal cord damage, such as spinal cord-related pain syndrome, and performed a nationwide survey investigating the prevalence, actual status, and features of this syndrome in Japan in order to gather basic information needed for planning control measures.

Methods

In this nationwide epidemiologic survey, a mail-in questionnaire was sent to 3,206 institutions throughout Japan certified by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (2,065 institutions) and the Japan Neurosurgical Society (1,141 institutions). The survey included the number of patients, frequency, and type of allodynia, concomitant diseases, and types of and responses to treatment.

Results

Valid responses were obtained from 552 institutions on 3,401 patients. Of these, 1,719 (50.5%) patients experienced no pain, and thus the study involved the analysis of data of the remaining 1,682 patients with pain. The most frequent underlying conditions were cervical spondylotic myelopathy (26.7%), spinal cord injury (17.4%), and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) of the cervical spine (14.1%). Among the 1,682 patients, 62.5% reported at-level pain, among which 43.0% presented with allodynia. On the other hand, 38.7% presented with below-level pain. The majority of patients (73.4%) used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and muscle relaxants (46.6%). The effectiveness of treatment was significantly higher in patients using anticonvulsants (31.1%) than in those using other medications. About a third of the patients stopped the treatment for either lack of effect or adverse effects.

Conclusions

The characteristics of NeP in patients with spinal cord-related pain syndrome varied according to its level in relation to the affected spinal segment (at-level and/or below-level). Unfortunately, medications are sometimes ineffective and have potential adverse effects. Further classification of allodynia is needed for effective symptom-based treatment.

Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury: Challenges and Research Perspectives

Neuropathic pain is a debilitating consequence of spinal cord injury (SCI) that remains difficult to treat because underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. In part, this is due to limitations of evaluating neuropathic pain in animal models in general, and SCI rodents in particular. Though pain in patients is primarily spontaneous, with relatively few patients experiencing evoked pains, animal models of SCI pain have primarily relied upon evoked withdrawals. Greater use of operant tasks for evaluation of the affective dimension of pain in rodents is needed, but these tests have their own limitations such that additional studies of the relationship between evoked withdrawals and operant outcomes are recommended. In preclinical SCI models, enhanced reflex withdrawal or pain responses can arise from pathological changes that occur at any point along the sensory neuraxis. Use of quantitative sensory testing for identification of optimal treatment approach may yield improved identification of treatment options and clinical trial design. Additionally, a better understanding of the differences between mechanisms contributing to at- versus below-level neuropathic pain and neuropathic pain versus spasticity may shed insights into novel treatment options. Finally, the role of patient characteristics such as age and sex in pathogenesis of neuropathic SCI pain remains to be addressed.

MicroRNA‑381/Hes1 is a potential therapeutic target for spinal cord injury

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether microRNA‑381 is a potential therapeutic target for spinal cord injury (SCI) and its possible mechanism. Reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for mRNA expression was used to analyze the changes of microRNA-381 expression. Cell viability and cell apoptosis were measured using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and flow cytometry. Caspase‑3 activity was measured using caspase‑3 activity kit, and western blot analysis was used to measure the protein expression of neurogenic locus notch homolog protein 1 (Notch1), notch 1 intracellular domain (NICD) and transcription factor HES-1 (Hes1). The data showed that microRNA‑381 expression of model SCI rats was downregulated compared with that of control rats. Overexpression of microRNA‑381 promoted cell proliferation, and inhibited apoptosis and caspase‑3 and apoptosis regulator BAX (Bax) protein expression in neurocytes. Overexpression of microRNA‑381 also increased Wnt and β‑catenin protein expression, and suppressed the protein expression of Notch1, NICD and Hes1 in neurocytes. Wnt inhibitor, Wnt‑C59 (1 µmol/l), inhibited cell proliferation, promoted apoptosis and caspase‑3 and Bax protein expression, suppressed β‑catenin protein expression and induced Hes1 protein expression in neurocytes following microRNA‑381 overexpression. Notch inhibitor, FLI‑06 (1 µmol/l), promoted cell proliferation, inhibited apoptosis and caspase‑3 and Bax protein expression, and suppressed NICD and Hes1 protein expression in neurocytes following microRNA‑381 overexpression. Thus, this study showed that overexpression of microRNA‑381 promotes cell proliferation of neurocytes in SCI via Hes1 expression, which may be a novel important mechanism for SCI in clinical applications.

Oxcarbazepine for neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Several anticonvulsant drugs are used in the management of neuropathic pain. Oxcarbazepine is an anticonvulsant drug closely related to carbamazepine. Oxcarbazepine has been reported to be efficacious in the treatment of neuropathic pain, but evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is conflicting. Oxcarbazepine is reportedly better tolerated than carbamazepine. This is the first update of a review published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of oxcarbazepine for different types of neuropathic pain.

SEARCH METHODS

On 21 November 2016, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase. We searched the Chinese Biomedical Retrieval System (January 1978 to November 2016). We searched the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) databases and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials in January 2017, and we wrote to the companies who make oxcarbazepine and to pain experts requesting additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs and randomised cross-over studies of oxcarbazepine for the treatment of people of any age or sex with any neuropathic pain were eligible. We planned to include trials of oxcarbazepine compared with placebo or any other intervention with a treatment duration of at least six weeks, regardless of administration route and dose.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Five multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials with a total of 862 participants were eligible for inclusion in this updated review. Three trials involved participants with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) (n = 634), one included people with neuropathic pain due to radiculopathy (n = 145), and one, which was newly identified at this update, involved participants with peripheral neuropathic pain of mixed origin (polyneuropathy, peripheral nerve injury or postherpetic neuralgia) (n = 83). Some studies did not report all outcomes of interest. For painful DPN, compared to the baseline, the proportion of participants who reported at least a 50% or 30% reduction of pain scores after 16 weeks of treatment in the oxcarbazepine group versus the placebo group were: at least 50% reduction: 34.8% with oxcarbazepine versus 18.2% with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 3.39, number of people needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6, 95% CI 3 to 41); and at least 30% reduction: 44.9% with oxcarbazepine versus 28.6% with placebo (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.44; NNTB 6, 95% CI 3 to 114; n = 146). Both results were based on data from a single trial, since two trials that found little or no benefit did not provide data that could be included in a meta-analysis. Although these trials were well designed, incomplete outcome data and possible unblinding of participants due to obvious adverse effects placed the results at a high risk of bias. There was also serious imprecision and a high risk of publication bias. The radiculopathy trial reported no benefit for the outcome 'at least 50% pain relief' from oxcarbazepine. In mixed neuropathies, 19.3% of people receiving oxcarbazepine versus 4.8% receiving placebo had at least 50% pain relief. These small trials had low event rates and provided, at best, low-quality evidence for any outcome. The proportion of people with 'improved' or 'very much improved' pain was 45.9% with oxcarbazepine versus 30.1% with placebo in DPN (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.88; n = 493; 2 trials; very-low-quality evidence) and 23.9% with oxcarbazepine versus 14.9% with placebo in radiculopathy (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.20; n = 145).We found no trials in other types of neuropathic pain such as trigeminal neuralgia.Trial reports stated that most adverse effects were mild to moderate in severity. Based on moderate-quality evidence from the three DPN trials, serious adverse effects occurred in 8.3% with oxcarbazepine and 2.5% with placebo (RR 3.65, 95% CI 1.45 to 9.20; n = 634; moderate-quality evidence). The number needed to treat for an additional harmful (serious adverse effect) outcome (NNTH) was 17 (95% CI 11 to 42). The RR for serious adverse effects in the radiculopathy trial was 3.13 (95% CI 0.65 to 14.98, n = 145). The fifth trial did not provide data.More people withdrew because of adverse effects with oxcarbazepine than with placebo (DPN: 25.6% with oxcarbazepine versus 6.8% with placebo; RR 3.83, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.40; radiculopathy: 42.3% with oxcarbazepine versus 14.9% with placebo; RR 2.84, 95% CI 1.55 to 5.23; mixed neuropathic pain: 13.5% with oxcarbazepine versus 1.2% with placebo; RR 11.51, 95% CI 1.54 to 86.15).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found little evidence to support the effectiveness of oxcarbazepine in painful diabetic neuropathy, neuropathic pain from radiculopathy and a mixture of neuropathies. Some very-low-quality evidence suggests efficacy but small trials, low event rates, heterogeneity in some measures and a high risk of publication bias means that we have very low confidence in the measures of effect. Adverse effects, serious adverse effects and adverse effects leading to discontinuation are probably more common with oxcarbazepine than placebo; however, the numbers of participants and event rates are low. More well-designed, multicentre RCTs investigating oxcarbazepine for various types of neuropathic pain are needed, and selective publication of studies or data should be avoided.

Neuropathic Pain and Spinal Cord Injury: Phenotypes and Pharmacological Management

Chronic neuropathic pain is a complicated condition after a spinal cord injury (SCI) that often has a lifelong and significant negative impact on life after the injury; therefore, improved pain management is considered a significant and unmet need. Neuropathic pain mechanisms are heterogeneous and the difficulty in determining their individual contribution to specific pain types may contribute to poor treatment outcomes in this population. Thus, identifying human neuropathic pain phenotypes based on pain symptoms, somatosensory changes, or cognitive and psychosocial factors that reflect specific spinal cord or brain mechanisms of neuropathic pain is an important goal. Once a pain phenotype can be reliably replicated, its relationship with biomarkers and clinical treatment outcomes can be analyzed, and thereby facilitate translational research and further the mechanistic understanding of individual differences in the pain experience and in clinical trial outcomes. The present article will discuss clinical aspects of SCI-related neuropathic pain, neuropathic pain phenotypes, pain mechanisms, potential biomarkers and pharmacological interventions, and progress regarding how defining neuropathic pain phenotypes may lead to more targeted treatments for these difficult pain conditions.