Detection of altered pain facilitatory and inhibitory mechanisms in patients with knee osteoarthritis by using a simple bedside tool kit (QuantiPain)

Quantitative sensory testing, psychological factors, and quality of life as predictors of current and future pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis

ABSTRACT

Substantial interindividual variability characterizes osteoarthritis (OA) pain. Previous findings identify quantitative sensory testing (QST), psychological factors, and health-related quality of life as contributors to OA pain and predictors of treatment outcomes. This exploratory study aimed to explain baseline OA pain intensity and predict OA pain after administration of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug in combination with paracetamol for 3 weeks. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain score was used to estimate OA pain presentation. One hundred one patients were assessed at baseline and follow-up using QST (pressure pain thresholds and temporal summation of pain [TSP]), symptoms of depression and anxiety, pain catastrophizing scales (PCSs), and health-related quality of life. Linear regression with backward selection identified that PCS significantly explained 34.2% of the variability in baseline KOOS pain, with nonsignificant contributions from TSP. Pain catastrophizing score and TSP predicted 29.3% of follow-up KOOS pain, with nonsignificant contributions from symptoms of anxiety. When assessed separately, PCS was the strongest predictor (32.2% of baseline and 24.1% of follow-up pain), but QST, symptoms of anxiety and depression, PCS, and quality of life also explained some variability in baseline and follow-up knee OA pain. Further analyses revealed that only TSP and PCS were not mediated by any other included variables, highlighting their role as unique contributors to OA pain presentation. This study emphasizes the importance of embracing a multimodal approach to OA pain and highlights PCS and TSP as major contributors to the baseline OA pain experience and the OA pain experience after OA treatment.

Development and validation of a home quantitative sensory testing tool-kit to assess changes in sensory and pain processing: a study in healthy young adults

ABSTRACT

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a set of methods for quantifying somatosensory functioning. Limitations of laboratory-based QST (LQST) include high cost, complexity in training, lack of portability, and time requirements for testing. Translating QST to a home setting could facilitate future research and clinical care. The objective of this study was to develop a home QST (HQST) tool-kit that is cost-effective, easy to use, and detects changes in sensory and pain processing. Thirty-two young healthy adults underwent sensory testing on their nondominant forearm using standard in-person LQST, followed by "simulated HQST" using video guidance in a separate room from the investigator before and after application of either a lidocaine or capsaicin cream. We observed good agreement between HQST and LQST scores, with significant correlations observed between the pinprick, pressure, cold and heat measures (|ρ| range = 0.36-0.54). The participants rated the HQST protocol as highly acceptable and safe but can be improved in future implementations. Home QST was able to detect hypoesthesia to vibration after lidocaine cream application (P = 0.024, d = 0.502) and could detect hypoalgesia and hyperalgesia to pressure and heat pain sensitivity tests after application of lidocaine and capsaicin creams, respectively (P-value range = <0.001-0.036, d-value range = 0.563-0.901). Despite limitations, HQST tool-kits may become a cost-effective, convenient, and scalable approach for improving sensory profiling in clinical care and clinical research.

Altered somatosensory functioning and mechanism-based classification in breast cancer patients with persistent pain

Pain is one of the most frequent and persistent side effects of breast cancer treatment. Besides pain, breast cancer survivors (BCS) are prone to experience a myriad of other signs and symptoms related to altered somatosensory function, including for example, hypoesthesia, allodynia, and hyperalgesia, both at the local site of cancer and in remote body parts. Different breast cancer treatments can have a direct effect on somatosensory functioning, resulting in a wide range of these signs and symptoms. To our knowledge, currently no comprehensive overview exists on altered somatosensory functioning and resulting signs and symptoms in BCS with persistent pain. Investigating altered somatosensory functioning in this population could provide more insights in the underpinning pathophysiological mechanisms and consequently improve prevention and treatment in the future. Therefore, in this paper, first, normal somatosensory functioning is described. Second, quantitative sensory testing is presented as the recommend method to evaluate somatosensory functioning. Third, existing evidence on altered somatosensory functioning in BCS with persistent pain is summarized. Altered somatosensory functioning related to the most common cancer treatment modalities, including surgery and radiotherapy, hormone therapy, and chemotherapy are discussed. In addition, evidence on the presence of nociplastic pain as pain resulting from altered somatosensory functioning without evidence for nociception and/or neuropathy in BCS is summarized. At last, a discussion on this available evidence, limitations, and perspectives for clinical practice and for research are made.

Concurrent validity of dynamic bedside quantitative sensory testing paradigms in breast cancer survivors with persistent pain

BACKGROUND

Studies on the concurrent validity of clinically applicable testing protocols for conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal summation of pain (TSP) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) with persistent pain are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the concurrent validity of two bedside protocols for CPM and TSP in comparison to a respective reference protocol. The participants' preferences for bedside CPM and TSP protocols were assessed.

METHODS

Thirty BCS experiencing persistent pain were included in this study. Each participant underwent a reference test along with two bedside alternatives for assessing both TSP and CPM. For CPM, a cold pressor test (CPT) and blood pressure cuff (BPC) were used as conditioning stimulus. The test stimulus was elicited in parallel by pressure pain threshold after 45 and 90 s of conditioning at the lower limb. The CPM reference test consisted of parallel heat stimuli at the forearms using a two-thermode system. TSP was elicited using a von Frey monofilament (256 mN) and an algometer (98 kPa) at the affected site and opposite lower limb. The TSP reference test consisted of heat stimuli at the affected site and opposite lower limb. Participants' testing preference was examined using a purpose-designed questionnaire. Spearman's rank test examined the correlation between protocols.

RESULTS

The two bedside CPM protocols were strongly correlated (r = 0.787-0.939, p < 0.005). A strong correlation was found between the BPC protocol and reference test using the relative effect magnitude (r = 0.541-0.555, p < 0.005). The bedside TSP protocols were moderately correlated with each other only at the lower limb using absolute change scores (r = 0.455, p = 0.012). No significant correlation was found between the bedside and reference TSP protocols.

CONCLUSION

The significantly moderate to very strong correlations between the bedside protocols validate their interchangeability. Researchers and clinicians should be able to choose which bedside protocol they utilize; however, participants favored the use of a BPC and algometer for the evaluation of CPM and TSP, respectively.

Central Sensitization in Cancer Survivors and Its Clinical Implications: State of the Art

Although the prevalence of cancer pain is 47% after treatment, cancer pain is often underestimated, and many patients are undertreated. The complexity of cancer pain contributes to the lack of its management. Recently, as the mechanism of cancer pain, it has become clear that central sensitization (CS) influences chronic pain conditions and the transition from acute to chronic pain. In this state-of-the-art review, we summarized the association of CS or central sensitivity syndrome with pain and the treatment for pain targeting CS in cancer survivors. The management of patients with CS should not only focus on tissue damage in either the affected body regions or within the central nervous system; rather, it should aim to target the underlying factors that sustain the CS process. Pain neuroscience education (PNE) is gaining popularity for managing chronic musculoskeletal pain and could be effective for pain and CS in breast cancer survivors. However, there is a study that did not demonstrate significant improvements after PNE, so further research is needed. Precision medicine involves the classification of patients into subgroups based on a multifaceted evaluation of disease and the implementation of treatment tailored to the characteristics of each patient, which may play a central role in the treatment of CS.

Quantitative sensory testing as an assessment tool to predict the response to standard pain treatment in knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Emerging evidence suggest that quantitative sensory testing (QST) may predict the treatment response to pain-relieving therapies. This systematic review and meta-analysis focus on the predictive value of QST for pain management of knee osteoarthritis (OA). MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for all studies from year 2000 to 2023 on pretreatment QST and treatment of OA including surgical, pharmaceutical, and nonsurgical and nonpharmaceutical therapies. Preclinical studies and reviews were excluded. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework website (link: https://osf.io/4FETK/, Identifier: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/4FETK). Meta-analysis were conducted to demonstrate the strength of the pre-treatment QST predictions on pain outcomes after OA treatments. Sixteen surgical (all on total knee arthroplasty [TKA], N = 1967), 5 pharmaceutical (4 on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], N = 271), and 4 exercise-based therapy studies (N = 232) were identified. Pretreatment QST parameters predicted pain-relieving treatment outcomes in 81% of surgical, 100% of pharmaceutical, and 50% of exercise-based therapy studies. Meta-analyses found pretreatment QST profiles to predicted pain outcomes after TKA (random effects: 0.309, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.206-0.405, P < 0.001), NSAIDs (random effects: 0.323, 95% CI: 0.194-0.441, P < 0.001), and exercise-based therapies (random effects: 0.417, 95% CI: 0.138-0.635, P = 0.004). The overall risk of bias for the included studies was low to moderate. This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate weak-to-moderate associations between pretreatment QST and pain outcomes after standard OA pain treatments. Based on this work, it is hypothesized that a subset of specific pain sensitive patients with OA exist and that these patients do not respond adequately to standard OA pain treatments.

Predicting pain after standard pain therapy for knee osteoarthritis - the first steps towards personalized mechanistic-based pain medicine in osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) is rising, and pain is the hallmark symptom of OA. Pain in OA is complicated and can be influenced by multiple joint-related factors and factors related to, e.g., physiological, epigenetic, and pain sensory profiles. Increasing evidence suggests that a subset of patients with OA are pain sensitive. This can be assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST). Common treatments of OA are total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and administration of 3-weeks of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which provide pain relief to many patients with OA. However, approx. 20% of patients experience chronic postoperative pain after TKA, whereas NSAIDs provide an average pain relief of approx. 25%. The current topical review focuses on the emerging evidence linking pretreatment QST to the treatment response of TKA and NSAID treatments.

CONTENT

MEDLINE was systematically searched for all studies from 2000 to 2022 on pretreatment QST, TKA, and NSAIDs. Pre-clinical studies, reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded.

SUMMARY

Currently, 14 studies on TKA and four studies on NSAIDs have been published with the aim to attempt prediction of the treatment response. The QST methodologies in the studies are inconsistent, but 11/14 (79%) studies on TKA and 4/4 (100%) studies on NSAIDs report statistically significant associations between pretreatment QST and chronic postoperative pain after TKA or analgesic effect after NSAID treatment. The strength of the associations remains low-to-moderate. The most consistent pretreatment QST predictors are pressure pain thresholds, temporal summation of pain, and conditioned pain modulation.

OUTLOOK

The use of QST as predictors of standard OA treatment is interesting, but the predictive strength remains low-to-moderate. A transition of QST from a research-based setting and into the clinic is not advised until the predictive strength has been improved and the methodology has been standardized.

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.

Mechanism-Based Pharmacological Treatment for Chronic Non-cancer Pain in Adolescents: Current Approaches and Future Directions

Chronic non-cancer pain in pediatrics is a widespread phenomenon that affects about 20% of adolescents (10-19 years old). Although interdisciplinary pain treatment programs, which often include pharmacological treatment, have emerged as the standard of care in management of this patient population, evidence regarding an optimal treatment is lacking. The efficacy and safety profiles of pharmacological treatments used to help adolescents suffering from chronic non-cancer pain remain understudied. This lack of evidence may increase polypharmacy and the risk of drug interactions and adverse events. This review examines evidence for the use of pharmacological treatments prescribed to treat chronic pain in adolescents (10-19 years old), with a focus on mechanism-based pharmacology. The objectives of this review are to: (a) review the evidence for mechanism-based pharmacological treatments for chronic non-cancer pain in adolescents and (b) describe the pharmacological agents that are commonly prescribed to manage chronic pain in adolescents, including dosage information, mechanism, and potential adverse effects. Pharmacological treatments should be used carefully with adolescents, ideally within an interdisciplinary treatment program that will incorporate physical rehabilitation, integrative medicine/active mind-body techniques, psychology, and global efforts to normalize daily activities.

The influence of exercise on clinical pain and pain mechanisms in patients with subacromial pain syndrome

Background

Few studies have investigated the underlying mechanisms for unilateral subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS). Therefore, this study examined (1) if 8‐weeks of exercise could modulate clinical pain or temporal summation of pain (TSP), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and exercise‐induced hypoalgesia (EIH) and (2) if any of these parameters could predict the effect of 8‐weeks of exercise in patients with unilateral SAPS.

Methods

Thirty‐seven patients completed a progressive abduction exercise program every other day for 8‐weeks. Worst shoulder pain in full abduction was rated on a numeric rating scale (NRS). Pain pressure thresholds (PPTs), TSP, CPM, EIH, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), PainDETECT questionnaire (PD‐Q), Pain Self‐Efficacy Questionnaire (PSE‐Q) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were assessed before and after intervention.

Results

The intervention improved worst pain intensity (p < 0.001), increased the CPM (p < 0.001), improved the sleep scores (p < 0.005) and reduced the PainDETECT ratings (p < 0.001). No changes were observed in PPT, TSP, EIH, SPADI, PCS and PSE‐Q (all p > 0.05). In a linear regression, the combination of all baseline parameters predicted 23.2% variance in absolute change in pain after 8 weeks. Applying backwards elimination to the linear regression yielded that baseline pain intensity combined with TSP predicted 33.8% variance.

Conclusion

This explorative study suggested reduction in pain, improved sleep quality and increased CPM after 8‐weeks of exercise. Furthermore, the results suggests that low pain intensity and high TSP scores (indicative for pain sensitisation) may predict a lack of pain improvement after exercise.