Pregabalin in the treatment of post-traumatic peripheral neuropathic pain: a randomized double-blind trial

Post-traumatic radial nerve neuroma: A case report

Introduction

Radial nerve neuromas (RNNs) are mostly post-traumatic conditions that occur after a complete or partial section of a nerve. Here we report a case of post-traumatic RNN with good functional progression after intense physical rehabilitation.

Case presentation

A 49 years old patient with a post-complete section of the radial nerve underwent intensive physical rehabilitation with two sessions of ultrasound-guided injections of 10 % glucose saline around the neuroma. 12 months later, the patient improved his wrist and hand finger extension functions.

Conclusion

Several surgical and non-surgical therapies have been proposed for the treatment of neuromas. However, no consensus currently exists, and management is frequently adapted to each patient.

The safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There are increasing concerns regarding the abusive potential of gabapentinoids putting at risk patients with neuropathic pain requiring long-term pain management. The evidence to support this is rather inconcusive.

AIM

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain with a focus on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and categorising the side effects according to the body systems they were affecting.

METHOD

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycoINFO, and CINAHL (EBSCO), and included RCTs to identify and critically appraise studies investigating safety and therapeutic effects of gabapentionoids in adults with neuropathic pain. Data extraction was conducted using an established Cochrane form and the risk-of-bias tool was used in the assessment of quality.

RESULTS

50 studies (12,398 participants) were included. The majority of adverse events pertained to the nervous system (7 effects) or psychiatric (3 effects) disorders. There were more adverse effects reported with pregabalin (36 effects) than with gabapentin (22 effects). Six pregabalin studies reported euphoria as a side effect, while no studies reported euphoria with gabapentin. This was the only side effect that may correlate with addictive potential. Gabapentioids were reported to significantly reduce pain compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Despite RCTs documenting the adverse events of gabapentionoids on the nervous system, there was no evidence of gabapentinoid use leading to addiction, suggesting an urgent need to design studies investigating their abusive potential.

Response profile in a rat model of exercise-induced hypoalgesia is associated with duloxetine, pregabalin and diclofenac effect on constriction-induced neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Exercise is a known trigger of the inhibitory pain modulation system and its analgesic effect is termed exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH). Previous studies have demonstrated that rats with deficient analgesic response following exercise develop more significant hypersensitivity following nerve injury compared to rats with substantial analgesic response following exercise.

OBJECTIVES

A rat model of EIH as an indicator of the pain inhibitory system's efficiency was used to explore the association between EIH profiles and the effect of pharmacotherapy on rat's neuropathic pain.

METHODS

EIH profiles were assessed by evaluating paw responses to mechanical stimuli before and after exercise on a rotating rod. Rats with a reduction of ≤33% in responses were classified as low EIH and those with ≥67% as high EIH. Low and high EIH rats underwent sciatic nerve chronic constriction injury (CCI). Paw responses to mechanical stimuli were measured at baseline, following CCI, and after treatment with diclofenac, duloxetine or pregabalin. In a different group of low and high EIH rats, EIH was measured before and following treatment with the same medications.

RESULTS

Low EIH rats developed more significant hypersensitivity following CCI. Duloxetine and pregabalin successfully reduced hypersensitivity, although significantly more so in low EIH rats. Diclofenac had limited effects, and only on low EIH rats. Four days of duloxetine administration transformed low EIH rats' profiles to high EIH.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that EIH profiles in rats can not only predict the development of hypersensitivity following injury but may also support targeted pharmacological treatment.

SIGNIFICANCE

Exercise is a known trigger of the inhibitory pain modulation. Rats with deficient analgesic response following exercise develop more significant hypersensitivity following nerve injury. Pain modulation profiles in rats can also support targeted pharmacological treatment; rats with deficient analgesic response following exercise benefit more from treatment with duloxetine and gabapentin. Treatment with duloxetine can improve pain modulation profile.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Postsurgical neuropathic pain: lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster or oral treatments in clinical practice

Aim: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of the lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (LMP) and oral first-line medications (OM) for the treatment of postsurgical neuropathic pain (PSNP) in routine clinical practice. Patients & methods: Data from a noninterventional, retrospective 24-week cohort study in patients with localized peripheral NP refractory to at least one recommended OM using anonymized German Pain eRegistry data were retrieved. A subgroup analysis was conducted on 531 datasets of PSNP patients. Results: Pain relief, improvements in pain-related impairments of daily living and quality of life, and tolerability were significantly greater under LMP than under OM (p < 0.001 for all parameters). Conclusion: These real-world data show the effectiveness and good tolerability of LMP for PSNP treatment in routine clinical practice.

Assessment of Serum Vitamin D Levels in the serum of Patients with Postherpetic neuralgia and its correlation to pain severity: A cross-sectional comparative study

INTRODUCTION

Vitamin D is an essential micronutrient for the maintenance of many functions in the human body. Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is caused by the reactivation of the latent varicella-zoster virus (VZV) in the neurons. This study aims to assess the serum vitamin D level in patients with PHN and to correlate the level of vitamin D with pain severity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A hospital-based cross-sectional comparative study was conducted in the period from April 2019 to January 2021. One hundred and sixty-two individuals, matched for age and gender, divided into cases and controls (81 for each). Serum levels of 25(OH)D were measured for cases and controls. Demographic data were taken, and then the diagnosis of neuropathic pain in cases was established using the Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaire.

RESULTS

We included 39 (52%) males in the PHN group and 36 (48%) in the control group. There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, marital status, smoking and BMI. The duration of pain in our study had a mean of 7.6 ± 3.6 months. We found the DN4 score for the pain to be negatively associated with vitamin D levels (Pearson's correlation coefficient: -0.511, P = .000). The levels of vitamin D were moderately associated with pain duration (Pearson's correlation: -0.466, P = .000).

CONCLUSION

PHN patients had a high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and those who had vitamin D deficiency were older and had higher degrees of pain for a longer duration. In PHN patients, vitamin D deficiency was moderately associated with increased severity and duration of pain.

Nonsurgical Approaches to Neuroma Management

Symptomatic neuromas and chronic neuropathic pain are significant problems affecting patients' quality of life and independence that are challenging to treat. These symptoms are due to structural and functional changes that occur peripherally within neuromas, as well as alterations that occur centrally within the brain and spinal cord. A multimodal approach is most effective, with goals to minimize opioid use, to capitalize on the synergistic effects of nonopioid medications and to explore potential benefits of novel adjunctive treatments.

Effect of pregabalin on nociceptive thresholds and immune responses in a mouse model of incisional pain

Background

It is known that some analgesics as well as pain can affect the immune system. The aim of this study was to investigate the analgesic effect and immunomodulation of pregabalin (PGB) in a mouse incisional pain model.

Methods

A postoperative pain model was induced by hind paw plantar incision in male BALB/c mice. Mice were randomly divided into four groups (n = 8) a saline-treated incision (incision), PGB-treated incision (PGB-incision), sham controls without incision or drug treatment (control), and a PGB-treated control (PGB-control). In the PGB treated groups, PGB was administered intraperitoneally (IP) 30 minutes before and 1 hour after the plantar incision. Changes of the mechanical nociceptive thresholds following incision were investigated. Mice were euthanized for spleen harvesting 12 hours after the plantar incision, and natural killer (NK) cytotoxicity to YAC 1 cells and lymphocyte proliferation responses to phytohemagglutinin were compared among these four groups.

Results

Mechanical nociceptive thresholds were decreased after plantar incision and IP PGB administration recovered these decreased mechanical nociceptive thresholds (P < 0.001). NK activity was increased by foot incision, but NK activity in the PGB-incision group was significantly lower than that in the Incision group (P < 0.001). Incisional pain increased splenic lymphocyte proliferation, but PGB did not alter this response.

Conclusions

Incisional pain alters cell immunity of the spleen in BALB/c mice. PGB showed antinocieptive effect on mouse incisional pain and attenuates the activation of NK cells in this painful condition. These results suggest that PGB treatment prevents increases in pain induced NK cell activity.

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.

Review of nonopioid multimodal analgesia for surgical and trauma patients

Purpose

Pain is a frequent finding in surgical and trauma patients, and effective pain control remains a common challenge in the hospital setting. Opioids have traditionally been the foundation of pain management; however, these agents are associated with various adverse effects and risks of dependence and diversion.

Summary

In response to the rising national opioid epidemic and the various risks associated with opioid use, multimodal pain management through use of nonopioid analgesics such as acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, α 2 agonists, N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, skeletal muscle relaxants, sodium channel blockers, and local anesthetics has gained popularity recently. Multimodal analgesia has synergistic therapeutic effects and can decrease adverse effects by enabling use of lower doses of each agent in the multimodal regimen. This review discusses properties of the various nonopioid analgesics and encourages pharmacists to play an active role in the selection, initiation, and dose-titration of multimodal analgesia. The choice of nonopioid agents should be based on patient comorbidities, hemodynamic stability, and the agents’ respective adverse effect profiles. A multidisciplinary plan for management of pain should be formulated during transitions of care and is an area of opportunity for pharmacists to improve patient care.

Conclusion

Multimodal analgesia effectively treats pain while decreasing adverse effects. There is mounting evidence to support use of this strategy to decrease opioid use. As medication experts, pharmacists can play a key role in the selection, initiation, and dose-titration of analgesic agents based on patient-specific factors.

Perioperative Pregabalin for Preventive Analgesia in Breast Cancer Surgery: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

Pregabalin is a drug for neuropathic pain. Antipronociceptive properties of pregabalin have led to its recent use as an adjuvant to the multimodal postoperative pain regimen. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative pregabalin on acute and chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) after breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

A meta-analysis including 8 randomized controlled trials searched from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. Subgroup analysis was performed according to doses and timecourse of pregabalin administration. Review Manager 5.3 was selected to conduct the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Preoperative pregabalin in breast cancer surgery alleviated acute postoperative pain at rest 24 hours after surgery by 0.31 points on an 0 to 10 Numerical Rating Scale (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.57 to -0.05). Morphine consumption showed a decrease in postoperative use by 1.09 mg (95% CI: -1.61 to -0.57). The incidence of CPSP 3 months after surgery was reduced to 46% (95% CI: 0.25-0.85). Postoperative nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and sedation showed no overall significant reductions. However, a decrease in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and an increase in the incidence of dizziness were noted when patients received 300 mg of pregabalin before surgery.

DISCUSSION

This study demonstrated that pregabalin showed more efficacy on chronic pain than acute pain after a breast cancer surgery. Further study based on doses and treatment course of pregabalin should be conducted to establish stronger evidence of treatment effects.

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.

Hypovitaminosis Din Postherpetic Neuralgia-High Prevalence and Inverse Association with Pain: A Retrospective Study

Hypovitaminosis D (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) <75 nmol/L) is associated with neuropathic pain and varicella-zoster virus (VZV) immunity. A two-part retrospective hospital-based study was conducted. Part I (a case-control study): To investigate the prevalence and risk of hypovitaminosis D in postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) patients compared to those in gender/index-month/age-auto matched controls who underwent health examinations. Patients aged ≥50 years were automatically selected by ICD-9 codes for shingle/PHN. Charts were reviewed. Part II (a cross-sectional study): To determine associations between 25(OH)D, VZV IgG/M, pain and items in the DN4 questionnaire at the first pain clinic visit of patients. Independent predictors of PHN were presented as adjusted odds ratios(AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Prevalence (73.9%) of hypovitaminosis D in 88 patients was high. In conditional logistic regressions, independent predictors for PHN were hypovitaminosis D (AOR3.12, 95% CI1.73–5.61), malignancy (AOR3.21, 95% CI 1.38–7.48) and Helicobacter pylori-related peptic ulcer disease (AOR3.47, 95% CI 1.71–7.03). 25(OH)D was inversely correlated to spontaneous/brush-evoked pain. Spontaneous pain was positively correlated to VZV IgM. Based on the receiver operator characteristic curve, cutoffs for 25(OH)D to predict spontaneous and brush-evoked pain were 67.0 and 169.0 nmol/L, respectively. A prospective, longitudinal study is needed to elucidate the findings.

Acute and chronic pain in orofacial trauma patients

Trauma or injury to the dentition and supporting tissues is associated with pain and discomfort, as expected, that may present immediately, shortly afterwards, or within a few days. Pain is an essential response to injury because it allows the organism to develop avoidance behavior to potential threats and helps the organism to avoid usage of the injured organ during the healing process. Not only does external trauma induce pain, but also essential invasive dental procedures such as extractions, dental implant insertions, root canal treatments, and oral surgeries are accompanied by similar post-surgical (post-traumatic) pain. The pain intensity after trauma varies and does not always correlate with the extent of injury. Trauma to the orofacial region or the teeth may also indirectly affect and induce pain in other orofacial structures such as the masticatory muscles, the temporomandibular joint, and even the cervical spine. In most cases, the pain will resolve as soon as healing of the affected tissue occurs or after dental and routine palliative treatment. In a limited number of cases, the pain persists beyond healing and evolves into a chronic pain state. Chronic pain in the orofacial region presents diagnostic and management challenges. Misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis of the oral chronic pain condition may lead to unnecessary dental treatment. This article will discuss diagnosis and treatment for acute and chronic pain as well as potential mechanisms involved in the undesirable transition from acute to chronic pain.

The relationship between the reporting of euphoria events and early treatment responses to pregabalin: an exploratory post-hoc analysis

Background

Euphoria is a complex, multifactorial problem that is reported as an adverse event in clinical trials of analgesics including pregabalin. The relationship between the reporting of euphoria events and pregabalin early treatment responses was examined in this exploratory post-hoc analysis.

Methods

Data were from patients with neuropathic or non-neuropathic chronic pain enrolled in 40 randomized clinical trials, who received pregabalin (75–600 mg/day) or placebo. Reports of treatment-emergent euphoria events were based on the Medical Dictionary of Regulatory Activities preferred term “euphoric mood”. Prevalence rates of euphoria events overall and by indication were assessed. Post-treatment endpoints included ≥30% improvements in pain and sleep scores up to 3 weeks as well as a ≥1-point improvement in daily pain score up to 11 days after treatment.

Results

13,252 patients were analyzed; 8,501 (64.1%) and 4,751 (35.9%) received pregabalin and placebo, respectively. Overall, 1.7% (n=222) of patients reported euphoria events. Among pregabalin-treated patients, a larger proportion who reported euphoria events achieved an early pain response compared with those who did not report euphoria (30% pain responders in week 1 with euphoria events [43.0%], without euphoria events [24.2%]). Results were similar for weeks 2 and 3. For Days 2–11, a larger proportion of pregabalin-treated patients with (relative to without) euphoria events were 1-point pain responders. Findings were similar in pregabalin-treated patients for sleep endpoints (30% sleep responders in week 1 with euphoria events [50.7%], without euphoria events [36.1%]). Similar results were found for weeks 2 and 3. Patients who received placebo showed similar patterns, although the overall number of them who reported euphoria events was small (n=13).

Conclusion

In patients who received pregabalin for neuropathic or non-neuropathic chronic pain, those who experienced euphoria events may have better early treatment responses than those who did not report euphoria events.

Frequency and Risk Factors for Prolonged Opioid Prescriptions After Surgery for Brachial Plexus Injury

PURPOSE

We hypothesized that patients with preoperative opioid prescriptions and diagnoses of depression and anxiety would be at increased risk for prolonged opioid prescriptions after surgery for brachial plexus injury (BPI).

METHODS

Using an administrative database of privately insured patients, we assembled a cohort of BPI surgery patients and a control group of non-BPI patients, matching for age, sex, and year. Pharmacy claims for prescriptions filled for opioids and neuropathic pain medications were examined 12 months before surgery to 180 days after surgery. The primary outcome was prolonged opioid prescription, defined as receiving a prescription 90 to 180 days after the index (BPI surgery or randomly selected date of service for controls). Multivariable regression was used to examine risk factors for postoperative opioid use, including diagnoses of depression, anxiety, drug abuse, tobacco use, and preoperative use of opioids and neuropathic pain medications. A subgroup analysis was performed for opioid-naive BPI patients between 30 days to 1 year before surgery.

RESULTS

Among BPI surgery patients (n = 1,936), 27.7% had prolonged opioid prescriptions. Among opioid-naive BPI patients (n = 911), 10.8% had prolonged opioid prescriptions. In controls (n = 19,360), frequency of prolonged opioid prescriptions was 0.11%. Among all BPI patients, after adjustment for age and sex, predictors of prolonged postoperative opioid prescriptions in BPI patients were preoperative opioids, preoperative neuropathic pain medication use, histories of drug abuse, tobacco use, and anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged postoperative opioids prescriptions after BPI reconstruction are higher than previous estimates among other surgical patients. In addition to establishing normative data among this population, our findings serve to increase awareness of risk factors for prolonged opioids after BPI reconstruction and encourage coordinated multidisciplinary care.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

A Clinical Overview of Off-label Use of Gabapentinoid Drugs

BACKGROUND

The gabapentinoid drugs gabapentin and pregabalin were originally developed as antiseizure drugs but now are prescribed mainly for treatment of pain. For gabapentin, the only pain-related indication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is postherpetic neuralgia. For pregabalin, FDA-approved indications related to pain are limited to postherpetic neuralgia, neuropathic pain associated with diabetic neuropathy or spinal cord injury, and fibromyalgia. Despite these limited indications, gabapentin and pregabalin are widely prescribed off-label for various other pain syndromes. Such use is growing, possibly because clinicians are searching increasingly for alternatives to opioids.

OBSERVATIONS

This report summarizes the limited published evidence to support off-label gabapentinoid uses, describes clinical cases in which off-label use is problematic, and notes how review articles and guidelines tend to overstate gabapentinoid effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians who prescribe gabapentinoids off-label for pain should be aware of the limited evidence and should acknowledge to patients that potential benefits are uncertain for most off-label uses.

Lidocaine medicated plaster, an additional potential treatment option for localized post-surgical neuropathic pain: efficacy and safety results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (lidocaine plaster) compared to placebo in patients with moderate to severe chronic post-surgical neuropathic pain (PSNP).

METHODS

Patients (n = 363) with a diagnosis of PSNP for a minimum of 3 months to 36 months were randomized (1:1) to lidocaine plaster or placebo for a 12 week double-blind treatment period. Randomization was stratified as "plaster-only" (no concomitant medication for PSNP) or as "add-on" (stable systemic medication for PSNP). The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in 24 hour average pain intensity at Week 12, assessed by 11 point numerical rating scale (NRS). The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01752322) and EudraCT (2012-000347-28).

RESULTS

Treatment with lidocaine or placebo plaster led to a clinically relevant reduction in average pain intensity. Pain reduction (least squares mean [LS mean] standard error [SE], [95% confidence interval, CI]) with lidocaine plaster (-1.70 [0.16], [-2.03, -1.38]) was numerically higher than with placebo (-1.47 [0.16], [-1.78, -1.15]) but the difference was not statistically significant (-0.23 [0.23], [-0.69, 0.22]). Pre-specified exploratory subgroup analyses showed the largest differentiation between lidocaine and placebo in patients without concomitant pain medication, and in patients with more than 1 year between surgery and enrollment. Many secondary outcomes showed a numerically larger improvement in favor of lidocaine. The most commonly reported adverse events were administration site reactions linked to topical administration.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically relevant pain reduction was observed with lidocaine plaster in patients with PSNP. The safety and tolerability profile is consistent with current knowledge.

Pregabalin for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane Review titled "Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults", and considers only neuropathic pain (pain from damage to nervous tissue). Antiepileptic drugs have long been used in pain management. Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug used in management of chronic pain conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of pregabalin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2009 to April 2018, online clinical trials registries, and reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing pregabalin (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and biases. Primary outcomes were: at least 30% pain intensity reduction over baseline; much or very much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale (moderate benefit); at least 50% pain intensity reduction; or very much improved on PGIC (substantial benefit). We calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial (NNTB) or harmful outcome (NNTH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 studies lasting 2 to 16 weeks, with 11,906 participants - 68% from 31 new studies. Oral pregabalin doses of 150 mg, 300 mg, and 600 mg daily were compared with placebo. Postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy, and mixed neuropathic pain predominated (85% of participants). High risk of bias was due mainly to small study size (nine studies), but many studies had unclear risk of bias, mainly due to incomplete outcome data, size, and allocation concealment.Postherpetic neuralgia: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (50% vs 25%; RR 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6 to 2.6); NNTB 3.9 (3.0 to 5.6); 3 studies, 589 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (32% vs 13%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.4); NNTB 5.3 (3.9 to 8.1); 4 studies, 713 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (62% vs 24%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.2); NNTB 2.7 (2.2 to 3.7); 3 studies, 537 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 15%; RR 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.5); NNTB 3.9 (3.1 to 5.5); 4 studies, 732 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 16% versus 5.5%, 600 mg 25% versus 5.8%; dizziness 300 mg 29% versus 8.1%, 600 mg 35% versus 8.8%.Painful diabetic neuropathy: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (47% vs 42%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.2); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 8 studies, 2320 participants, moderate-quality evidence), more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (31% vs 24%; RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.5); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 11 studies, 2931 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had PGIC much or very much improved (51% vs 30%; RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.0); NNTB 4.9 (3.8 to 6.9); 5 studies, 1050 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (63% vs 52%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.4); NNTB 9.6 (5.5 to 41); 2 studies, 611 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 28%; RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7); NNTB 7.8 (5.4 to 14); 5 studies, 1015 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 11% versus 3.1%, 600 mg 15% versus 4.5%; dizziness 300 mg 13% versus 3.8%, 600 mg 22% versus 4.4%.Mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (48% vs 36%; RR 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4); NNTB 8.2 (5.7 to 15); 4 studies, 1367 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (34% vs 20%; RR 1.5 (1.2 to 1.9); NNTB 7.2 (5.4 to 11); 4 studies, 1367 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence (12% vs 3.9%) and dizziness (23% vs 6.2%) were more common with pregabalin.Central neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (44% vs 28%; RR 1.6 (1.3 to 2.0); NNTB 5.9 (4.1 to 11); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence) and at least 50% pain intensity reduction (26% vs 15%; RR 1.7 (1.2 to 2.3); NNTB 9.8 (6.0 to 28); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence (32% vs 11%) and dizziness (23% vs 8.6%) were more common with pregabalin.Other neuropathic pain conditions: Studies show no evidence of benefit for 600 mg pregabalin in HIV neuropathy (2 studies, 674 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and limited evidence of benefit in neuropathic back pain or sciatica, neuropathic cancer pain, or polyneuropathy.Serious adverse events, all conditions: Serious adverse events were no more common with placebo than with pregabalin 300 mg (3.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 17 studies, 4112 participants, high-quality evidence) or pregabalin 600 mg (3.4% vs 3.4%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.5); 16 studies, 3995 participants, high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence shows efficacy of pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuralgia, and mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain, and absence of efficacy in HIV neuropathy; evidence of efficacy in central neuropathic pain is inadequate. Some people will derive substantial benefit with pregabalin; more will have moderate benefit, but many will have no benefit or will discontinue treatment. There were no substantial changes since the 2009 review.

Benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain: a rapid review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

Rapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria.

INTERVENTIONS

Pregabalin or placebo.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Our primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.

The Possible Preventive Role of Pregabalin in Postmastectomy Pain Syndrome: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT

Chronic postmastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) has a considerable negative impact on the quality of life of breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the possible preventive role of perioperative pregabalin in PMPS.

METHODS

This randomized controlled study included 200 patients with breast cancer scheduled for elective breast cancer surgery. They were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. The pregabalin group received 75 mg of pregabalin twice daily for seven days and the control group received oral equivalent placebo capsules. The primary outcome was development of neuropathic PMPS. Neuropathic pain was assessed using the Grading System for Neuropathic Pain. Secondary outcome measures were safety and Visual Analogue Scale scores.

RESULTS

Neuropathic pain was significantly less frequent in the pregabalin group compared to the control group at four weeks (P = 0.005), 12 weeks (P = 0.002), and 24 weeks (P < 0.001) postoperatively. PMPS was diagnosed in 11 patients (11%) of the pregabalin group and 29 patients (29%) of the control group (P < 0.001, relative risk: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12-0.56). At the three follow-up time points, Visual Analogue Scale scores during the first three postoperative weeks were comparable in both groups while they were significantly lower in the pregabalin group at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. These two groups were comparable in the frequency of adverse events (P = 0.552).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative oral pregabalin 75 mg twice daily, starting at the morning of surgery and continued for one week, could reduce the frequency of postmastectomy pain syndrome.

Prediction of therapeutic response to pregabalin in subjects with neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate four models based on potential predictors for achieving a response to pregabalin treatment for neuropathic pain (NeP).

METHODS

In total, 46 pain studies were screened, of which 27 NeP studies met the criteria for inclusion in this analysis. Data were pooled from these 27 placebo-controlled randomized trials to assess if baseline characteristics (including mean pain and pain-related sleep interference [PRSI] scores), early clinical response during weeks 1-3 of treatment (change from baseline in pain and PRSI scores), and presence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were predictive of therapeutic response. Therapeutic response was defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline in either pain and/or PRSI scores at week 5 with supplemental analyses to predict pain outcomes at weeks 8 and 12. Predictors of Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) were also evaluated. Four models were assessed: Random Forest, Logistic Regression, Naïve Bayes, and Partial Least Squares.

RESULTS

The number of pregabalin-treated subjects in the training/test datasets, respectively, were 2818/1407 (30% pain analysis), 2812/1405 (30% sleep analysis), and 2693/1345 (PGIC analysis). All four models demonstrated consistent results, and the most important predictors of treatment outcomes at week 5 and pain outcomes at weeks 8 and 12 were the reduction in pain score and sleep score in the first 1-3 weeks. The presence or absence of the most common AEs in the first 1-3 weeks was not correlated with any treatment outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects with an early response to pregabalin are more likely to experience an end-of-treatment response.

Efficacy of pregabalin in post-traumatic peripheral neuropathic pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

The growing need for symptomatic treatment of post-traumatic neuropathic pain (PTNP) continues to be unmet. Studies evaluating the efficacy of pregabalin for reducing neuropathic pain following trauma and surgery yielded positive results over ≤ 8-week treatment. To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin over 3 months in patients with PTNP, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial evaluated patients with PTNP at 101 centers in 11 countries—the longest, largest such trial. Adults diagnosed with PTNP were randomly assigned (1:1) to 15 weeks of pregabalin (flexibly dosed 150–600 mg/day) or matching placebo. Primary efficacy analysis was by mixed-model repeated measures comparing change from baseline to week 15 in weekly mean pain scores between active and placebo groups. Evaluable patients included 274 in the pregabalin group and 265 in the placebo group. Trauma was surgical in 49.6% of patients, non-surgical in the remainder. The primary efficacy analysis showed no statistically significant difference between pregabalin and placebo groups in the change from baseline to week 15 [mean difference, − 0.22 points (95% confidence interval, 0.54–0.10); p = 0.1823]. However, comparisons for key secondary outcome measures yielded p values < 0.05 favoring pregabalin. Consistent with the known safety profile of pregabalin, the most common adverse events were dizziness and somnolence (14.6 and 9.9% of patients, respectively) with pregabalin (vs 4.2 and 3.4% with placebo). These findings demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a large, phase 3 registration trial in the heterogeneous PTNP study population.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01701362.

Treatment of Postherpetic Neuralgia With Intravenous Administration of Zinc Sulfate: A Case Report

Gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) are first-line drugs for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), but some PHN patients have inadequate therapeutic response. Zinc deficiency has been identified as a risk factor for PHN. Zinc can alleviate pain through binding to Ca(v)3.2 T-channels and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors. Mechanisms of gabapentinoids on neuropathic pain include inhibiting N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors and calcium channels. The aforementioned findings provide a molecular pain-relieving basis for zinc supplements as an add-on therapy to pregabalin. We report 2 zinc-deficient PHN patients who received zinc sulfate intravenously as an add-on therapy to pregabalin and responded well.

Efficacy and safety of a T-type calcium channel blocker in patients with neuropathic pain: A proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blind and controlled trial

BACKGROUND

T-type calcium channels have been shown to play an important role in the initiation and maintenance of neuropathic pain and represent a promising therapeutic target for new analgesic treatments. Ethosuximide (ETX), an anticonvulsant and a T-type channel blocker has shown analgesic effect in several chronic pain models but has not yet been evaluated in patients with neuropathic pain.

METHODS

This proof-of-concept, multicentre, double-blind, controlled and randomized trial compared the efficacy and safety of ETX (given as add-on therapy) to an inactive control (IC) in 114 patients with non-diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. After a 7-day run-in period, eligible patients aged over 18 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to ETX or IC for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the difference between groups in the pain intensity (% of change from the baseline to end of treatment) assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with EudraCT (2013-004801-26) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02100046).

RESULTS

The study was stopped during the interim analysis due to the high number of adverse events in the active treatment group. ETX failed to reduce total pain and showed a poor tolerance in comparison to IC. In the per-protocol analysis, ETX significantly reduced pain intensity by 15.6% (95% CI -25.8; -5.4) from baseline compared to IC (-7.8%, 95% CI -14.3; -1.3; p = 0.033), but this result must be interpreted with caution because of a small subgroup of patients.

CONCLUSION

Ethosuximide did not reduce the severity of neuropathic pain and induces, at the doses used, many adverse events.

SIGNIFICANCE

This article shows that ETX is not effective to treat neuropathic pain. Nevertheless, per-protocol analysis suggests a possible analgesic effect of ETX. Thus, our work adds significant knowledge to preclinical and clinical data on the benefits of T-type calcium channel inhibition for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Effect of Pregabalin and Diclofenac on tactile allodynia, mechanical hyperalgesia and pro inflammatory cytokine levels (IL-6, IL-1β) induced by chronic constriction injury of the infraorbital nerve in rats

The present study evaluated the effects of systemic pregabalin (PG) and diclofenac (Dic) on neuropathic orofacial pain induced by chronic constriction injury (CCI) of the infraorbital nerve (ION) and on the pro-inflammatory cytokines levels in the affected nerve. Fifty-four rats underwent left infra orbital nerve CCI, and 7 days after the procedure as the pain developed, the rats were randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups: PG 300, 30 or 10 mg/kg, Dic 10, 5 or 1 mg/kg or saline group (Sal) (n/group = 8). Addiitonal 8 rats served as naïve control group. Tactile-allodynia and Mechano-hyperalgesia were tested before the surgical procedure and at days 7, 8, and 9 postoperatively. On the 9th day, the rats were euthanized and the affected and contralateral sciatic nerves were harvested to assess IL-6 and IL-1β nerve levels employing enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Daily injection of PG (all doses) significantly reduced tactile-allodynia and mechano-hyperalgesia (p < .05) while Dic did not. On the 9th day, the ipsilateral nerve IL-6 levels were significantly decreased (p < .05) in the PG and DIC groups compared to the Sal group. IL-1β levels demonstrated a significant reduction (p < .05) in the PG group when compared to saline. These results suggest that PG but not Dic may be effective in reducing neuropathic orofacial pain. The mechanisms of action may be associated to some extent with reduction in IL-1β levels in the affected nerve.

Pregabalin for the treatment of neuropathic pain: a narrative review for primary care providers

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain (NeP) is a distinct type of pain caused by damage to the nervous system itself. This often severe and chronic type of pain requires specific treatments that target the underlying pain pathophysiology.

AIM

The purpose of the current narrative review is to provide an overview of pregabalin (Lyrica ¹ ) for the treatment of NeP including its effects on pain, pain-related sleep interference, and other health-related outcomes, timing of therapeutic effect, safety and tolerability, and dosing. The information provided here will help primary care providers develop more effective NeP treatment strategies.

Neuropathic pain responds better to increased doses of pregabalin: an in-depth analysis of flexible-dose clinical trials

Background

Pregabalin is an effective treatment option for many patients with neuropathic pain. Higher doses of pregabalin have been shown to be more effective in improving pain outcomes but, in practice, failing to appropriately increase the dose can leave patients under-treated.

Methods

This was a pooled analysis of 6 flexible-dose clinical trials of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain (diabetic peripheral neuropathy, peripheral herpetic neuralgia, posttraumatic pain, or postsurgical pain). Patients were divided into “dose pathway” groups based on their weekly pregabalin dose from the start of their trial to the first week of their maintenance phase. These were: 150 mg/day only; 150 to 300 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 450 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 450 to 600 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 600 mg/day; 300 to 600 mg/day. Pain outcomes assessed for each group at each new dose were proportion of 30% and 50% responders (≥30% or ≥50% reduction in mean pain score from baseline) and mean change in pain score. Percent change in mean pain score from baseline was assessed using a marginal structural model.

Results

Seven hundred and sixty-one patients treated with flexible-dose pregabalin were included in the analysis. For each dose pathway group, there was a notably greater proportion of 30% and 50% responders and change in pain score, at each escalating dose. As assessed by the marginal structural model, higher doses of pregabalin were estimated to result in a significantly greater change in mean pain score at each week. This dose response with flexible-dose pregabalin was consistent with that previously observed with fixed-dose pregabalin.

Conclusion

Many patients who do not respond to lower doses of pregabalin will respond with notable improvements in pain outcomes when the dose is escalated. These data should encourage physicians treating patients with neuropathic pain to escalate pregabalin to the dose that delivers optimal analgesia and tolerable side effects.

Evidence and consensus recommendations for the pharmacological management of pain in India

Despite enormous progress in the field of pain management over the recent years, pain continues to be a highly prevalent medical condition worldwide. In the developing countries, pain is often an undertreated and neglected aspect of treatment. Awareness issues and several misconceptions associated with the use of analgesics, fear of adverse events - particularly with opioids and surgical methods of analgesia - are major factors contributing to suboptimal treatment of pain. Untreated pain, as a consequence, is associated with disability, loss of income, unemployment and considerable mortality; besides contributing majorly to the economic burden on the society and the health care system in general. Available guidelines suggest that a strategic treatment approach may be helpful for physicians in managing pain in real-world settings. The aim of this manuscript is to propose treatment recommendations for the management of different types of pain, based on the available evidence. Evidence search was performed by using MEDLINE (by PubMed) and Cochrane databases. The types of articles included in this review were based on randomized control studies, case-control or cohort studies, prospective and retrospective studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines and evidence-based consensus recommendations. Articles were reviewed by a multidisciplinary expert panel and recommendations were developed. A stepwise treatment algorithm-based approach based on a careful diagnosis and evaluation of the underlying disease, associated comorbidities and type/duration of pain is proposed to assist general practitioners, physicians and pain specialists in clinical decision making.

Endogenous analgesic effect of pregabalin: A double-blind and randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is widely used to measure endogenous analgesia, and a recent study indicated that drugs that act on endogenous analgesia are more effective in individuals with lower CPM. Recent animal studies have indicated that pregabalin activates endogenous analgesia by stimulating the descending pain inhibitory system. The present study examined whether the analgesic effect of pregabalin is greater in individuals with lower original endogenous analgesia using CPM.

METHODS

Fifty-nine healthy subjects were randomly assigned to either a pregabalin group or a placebo group, and 50 of them completed the study. CPM was measured before and after pregabalin or placebo administration. The correlation of initial CPM to change in CPM was compared between the pregabalin and placebo groups.

RESULTS

Initial CPM was significantly correlated with the change in CPM in the pregabalin group (r = -0.73, p < 0.0001) but not in the placebo group (p = 0.56) (difference in correlation coefficients between groups; p = 0.004). Furthermore, the initial CPM significantly affected the change in CPM in the pregabalin group but not in the placebo group (pregabalin group: adj R²  = 0.51, p < 0.001, y = -0.54x + 2.98; placebo group: p = 0.56, significant difference in regression slopes; p = 0.015). These results indicate that pregabalin has a higher endogenous analgesic effect in individuals with lower original endogenous analgesia.

SIGNIFICANCE

The analgesic effect of pregabalin depends on the original endogenous analgesia status. Its effect on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) was stronger for subjects with lower original endogenous analgesia, suggesting that the mechanism of pregabalin involves the improvement of endogenous analgesia.

Pregabalin for Neuropathic Pain: Why Benefits Could Be Expected for Multiple Pain Conditions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Limited research exists to support the extrapolation of the analgesic efficacy of pregabalin from one neuropathic pain condition to another. This retrospective analysis evaluated similarities in the efficacy of pregabalin for treating neuropathic pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), and spinal cord injury (SCI) in a Japanese population, as a basis for considering the extrapolation of these data to other neuropathic pain conditions.

METHODS

Data were analysed across pregabalin doses within each pain condition, from three comparable 13- to 16-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) and the corresponding 52-week, open-label extension trials of pregabalin in Japanese patients with PHN, DPN or SCI. Efficacy outcomes in the RCTs included endpoint and weekly mean pain and sleep interference scores; endpoint proportions of responders in pain; Patient Global Impression of Change scores; and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores or Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) assessments. Study discontinuation rates were compared between treatment groups. The extension trials assessed pain intensity, using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire.

RESULTS

In the RCTs for all pain conditions, significant improvements in comparison with placebo in mean pain and sleep interference scores were evident after 1 week with pregabalin and were sustained throughout the treatment periods (p < 0.05). At the study endpoint, in comparison with placebo, a significantly greater percentage of pregabalin-treated patients experienced a ≥30 % reduction in pain across the RCTs (p < 0.05), and pregabalin significantly improved six of 16 SF-36 subscale scores in the PHN and DPN trials (p < 0.05). In the SCI trial, pregabalin-treated patients had numerically better outcomes of HADS scores. In the extension trials, improvements in pain intensity were maintained over a 52-week period.

CONCLUSION

Similarities in the pregabalin efficacy profiles, including time to onset and magnitude of response, were confirmed regardless of the neuropathic pain condition. These data support the potential for extrapolating analgesic efficacy to other neuropathic pain conditions. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV IDENTIFIERS

NCT00394901, NCT00553475, NCT00407745, NCT00424372, NCT00553280, NCT01202227.

Assessment of the effectiveness and safety of Ethosuximide in the Treatment of non-Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: EDONOT-protocol of a randomised, parallel, controlled, double-blinded and multicentre clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Currently available analgesics are ineffective in 30-50% of patients suffering from neuropathic pain and often induce deleterious side effects. T-type calcium channel blockers (mibefradil, ethosuximide, NNC 55-0396) are of great interest for the development of new symptomatic treatments of neuropathic pain, due to their various effects on pain perception. Interestingly, ethosuximide, which has already been approved for treating epilepsy, is available on the European market for clinical use. Despite numerous preclinical data demonstrating an antinociceptive effect of ethosuximide in various animal models of neuropathic pain, no clinical studies have been published to date on the analgesic efficacy of ethosuximide in patients with neuropathic pain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Ethosuximide in the Treatment of non-Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain (EDONOT) trial is a randomised, parallel, controlled, double-blinded, multicentre clinical study. It is the first clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ethosuximide in the treatment of non-diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Adult patients exhibiting peripheral neuropathic pain (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) ≥4 and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4)≥4) for at least 3 months and under stable analgesic treatment for at least 1 month will be included. Patients (n=220) will be randomly assigned to receive either ethosuximide or control treatment for 6 weeks following a 1 week run-in period. The primary end point is the intensity of neuropathic pain, assessed by NRS (0-10) before and after 6 weeks of treatment. The secondary end points are safety (adverse events are collected during the study: daily by the patient on the logbook and during planned phone calls by investigators), the intensity and features of neuropathic pain (assessed by Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) questionnaires) and health-related quality of life (assessed by Medical Outcome Study Short Form 12 (MOS SF-12) and Leeds questionnaires).

ETHICS AND COMMUNICATION

The study was approved by an independent ethics committee (CPP Sud-Est VI, France, IRB00008526) and registered by the French competent authority (Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament (ANSM)).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02100046, Recruiting.

Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 12, 2011. Phantom limb pain (PLP) is pain that arises in the missing limb after amputation and can be severe, intractable, and disabling. Various medications have been studied in the treatment of phantom pain. There is currently uncertainty in the optimal pharmacologic management of PLP.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to summarise the evidence of effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions in treating PLP.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, and Embase for relevant studies. We ran the searches for the original review in September 2011 and subsequent searches for this update up to April 2016. We sought additional studies from clinical trials databases and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials studying the effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions compared with placebo, another active treatment, or no treatment, in established PLP. We considered the following outcomes: change in pain intensity, function, sleep, depression or mood, quality of life, adverse events, treatment satisfaction, and withdrawals from the study.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed issues of study quality and extracted efficacy and adverse event data. Due to the wide variability in the studies, we did not perform a meta-analysis for all the interventions and outcomes, but attempted to pool the results of some studies where possible. We prepared a qualitative description and narrative summary of results. We assessed clinical heterogeneity by making qualitative comparisons of the populations, interventions, outcomes/outcome measures, and methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We added only one new study with 14 participants to this updated review. We included a 14 studies (10 with low risk of bias and 4 with unclear risk of bias overall) with a total of 269 participants. We added another drug class, botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs), in particular botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A), to the group of medications reviewed previously. Our primary outcome was change in pain intensity. Most studies did not report our secondary outcomes of sleep, depression or mood, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, or withdrawals from the study.BoNT/A did not improve phantom limb pain intensity during the six months of follow-up compared with lidocaine/methylprednisolone.Compared with placebo, morphine (oral and intravenous) was effective in decreasing pain intensity in the short term with reported adverse events being constipation, sedation, tiredness, dizziness, sweating, voiding difficulty, vertigo, itching, and respiratory problems.The N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists ketamine (versus placebo; versus calcitonin) and dextromethorphan (versus placebo), but not memantine, had analgesic effects. The adverse events of ketamine were more serious than placebo and calcitonin and included loss of consciousness, sedation, hallucinations, hearing and position impairment, and insobriety.The results for gabapentin in terms of pain relief were conflicting, but combining the results favoured treatment group (gabapentin) over control group (placebo) (mean difference -1.16, 95% confidence interval -1.94 to -0.38; 2 studies). However, gabapentin did not improve function, depression score, or sleep quality. Adverse events experienced were somnolence, dizziness, headache, and nausea.Compared with an active control benztropine mesylate, amitriptyline was not effective in PLP, with dry mouth and dizziness as the most frequent adverse events based on one study.The findings for calcitonin (versus placebo; versus ketamine) and local anaesthetics (versus placebo) were variable. Adverse events of calcitonin were headache, vertigo, drowsiness, nausea, vomiting, and hot and cold flushes. Most of the studies were limited by their small sample sizes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we identified another study that added another form of medical therapy, BoNTs, specifically BoNT/A, to the list of pharmacologic interventions being reviewed for clinical efficacy in phantom limb pain. However, the results of this study did not substantially change the main conclusions. The short- and long-term effectiveness of BoNT/A, opioids, NMDA receptor antagonists, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, calcitonins, and local anaesthetics for clinically relevant outcomes including pain, function, mood, sleep, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and adverse events remain unclear. Based on a small study, BoNT/A (versus lidocaine/methylprednisolone) does not decrease phantom limb pain. Morphine, gabapentin, and ketamine demonstrate favourable short-term analgesic efficacy compared with placebo. Memantine and amitriptyline may not be effective for PLP. However, results must be interpreted with caution, as they were based mostly on a small number of studies with limited sample sizes that varied considerably and also lacked long-term efficacy and safety outcomes. The direction of efficacy of calcitonin, local anaesthetics, and dextromethorphan needs further clarification. Overall, the efficacy evidence for the reviewed medications is thus far inconclusive. Larger and more rigorous randomised controlled trials are needed for us to reach more definitive conclusions about which medications would be useful for clinical practice.

Real-life efficacy of pregabalin for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain in daily clinical practice in Denmark: the NEP-TUNE study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide evidence regarding the real-life efficacy of pregabalin in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (NeP) in Denmark.

METHODS

In this prospective, observational, noninterventional study, pregabalin (Lyrica(®)) was prescribed following usual clinical practice. Compared with baseline, the primary study end points after 3 months of observation were changes in 1) the average level of pain during the past week, 2) the worst level of pain during the past week, and 3) the least level of pain during the past week. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to perform paired analyses, and a multivariate regression analysis investigated factors driving change in pain.

RESULTS

A total of 86 of the 128 patients included were regarded as efficacy evaluable (those completing 3 months of pregabalin treatment). Patients (59 years) were long-time sufferers of peripheral NeP, and 38% of them had comorbidities. The majority had previously been treated with tricyclic antidepressants or gabapentin. The average dose of pregabalin was 81.5 mg/d at baseline and 240 mg/d after 3 months. A clinically and statistically significant improvement of 2.2 points in the average level of pain intensity was found after 3 months. The higher the pain intensity at baseline, the higher was the reduction of the pain score. Positive results were also found for pain-related sleep interference, patients' global impression of change, quality of life, and work and productivity impairment. Twenty-one patients reported 28 adverse events.

CONCLUSION

This real-life study indicates that for some patients (two-thirds), addition of pregabalin for peripheral NeP helps to reduce their pain intensity significantly.

The effect of frequent hemodialysis on self-reported sleep quality: Frequent Hemodialysis Network Trials

BACKGROUND

Many patients who receive maintenance hemodialysis experience poor sleep. Uncontrolled studies suggest frequent hemodialysis improves sleep quality, which is a strong motivation for some patients to undertake the treatment. We studied the effects of frequent in-center ('daily') and nocturnal home hemodialysis on self-reported sleep quality in two randomized trials.

METHODS

Participants were randomly assigned to frequent (six times per week) or conventional (three times per week) hemodialysis in the Frequent Hemodialysis Network Daily (n = 245) and Nocturnal (n = 87) Trials. We used the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Problems Index II (SPI II), a validated and reliable instrument in patients with end-stage renal disease, to measure self-reported sleep quality. The SPI II is scored from 0-100, with a higher value indicating poorer quality of sleep. A mean relative decline in SPI II would suggest improved sleep quality. The primary sleep outcome was the change in the SPI II score over 12 months.

RESULTS

In the Daily Trial, after adjustment for baseline SPI II, subjects randomized to frequent as compared with conventional in-center hemodialysis experienced a 4.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4-8.0] point adjusted mean relative decline in SPI II at 4 months and a 2.6 (95% CI -2.3-7.5) point adjusted mean relative decline at 12 months. In the Nocturnal Trial, subjects randomized to frequent nocturnal as compared with conventional home hemodialysis experienced 2.9 (95% CI -3.4-9.3) and 4.5 (95% CI -3.2-12.2) point mean relative declines at Months 4 and 12, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a possible benefit of frequent in-center hemodialysis was observed at 4 months, neither frequent in-center hemodialysis nor home nocturnal hemodialysis demonstrated significant improvements in self-reported sleep quality compared with conventional hemodialysis at 12 months.

Memantine before Mastectomy Prevents Post-Surgery Pain: A Randomized, Blinded Clinical Trial in Surgical Patients

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain following surgical treatment for breast cancer with or without chemotherapy is a clinical burden and patients frequently report cognitive, emotional and quality of life impairment. A preclinical study recently showed that memantine administered before surgery may prevent neuropathic pain development and cognitive dysfunction. With a translational approach, a clinical trial has been carried out to evaluate whether memantine administered before and after mastectomy could prevent the development of neuropathic pain, the impairment of cognition and quality of life.

METHOD

A randomized, pilot clinical trial included 40 women undergoing mastectomy in the Oncology Department, University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France. Memantine (5 to 20 mg/day; n = 20) or placebo (n = 20) was administered for four weeks starting two weeks before surgery. The primary endpoint was pain intensity measured on a (0-10) numerical rating scale at three months post-mastectomy.

RESULTS

Data analyses were performed using mixed models and the tests were two-sided, with a type I error set at α = 0.05. Compared with placebo, patients receiving memantine showed at three months a significant difference in post-mastectomy pain intensity, less rescue analgesia and a better emotional state. An improvement of pain symptoms induced by cancer chemotherapy was also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows for the first time the beneficial effect of memantine to prevent post-mastectomy pain development and to diminish chemotherapy-induced pain symptoms. The lesser analgesic consumption and better well-being of patients for at least six months after treatment suggests that memantine could be an interesting therapeutic option to diminish the burden of breast cancer therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01536314.

Mechanisms of the gabapentinoids and α 2 δ-1 calcium channel subunit in neuropathic pain

The gabapentinoid drugs gabapentin and pregabalin are key front‐line therapies for various neuropathies of peripheral and central origin. Originally designed as analogs of GABA, the gabapentinoids bind to the α₂δ‐1 and α₂δ‐2 auxiliary subunits of calcium channels, though only the former has been implicated in the development of neuropathy in animal models. Transgenic approaches also identify α₂δ‐1 as key in mediating the analgesic effects of gabapentinoids, however the precise molecular mechanisms remain unclear. Here we review the current understanding of the pathophysiological role of the α₂δ‐1 subunit, the mechanisms of analgesic action of gabapentinoid drugs and implications for efficacy in the clinic. Despite widespread use, the number needed to treat for gabapentin and pregabalin averages from 3 to 8 across neuropathies. The failure to treat large numbers of patients adequately necessitates a novel approach to treatment selection. Stratifying patients by sensory profiles may imply common underlying mechanisms, and a greater understanding of these mechanisms could lead to more direct targeting of gabapentinoids.

Imipramine and pregabalin combination for painful polyneuropathy: a randomized controlled trial

Monotherapy with first-line drugs for neuropathic pain often fails to provide sufficient pain relief or has unacceptable side effects because of the need for high doses. The aim of this trial was to test whether the combination of imipramine and pregabalin in moderate doses would relieve pain more effectively than monotherapy with either of the drugs. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, multicenter trial consisting of four 5-week treatment periods in patients with painful polyneuropathy. Treatment arms were imipramine 75 mg/d vs pregabalin 300 mg/d vs combination therapy vs placebo. Patients with polyneuropathy and symptoms for more than 6 months, age 20 to 85 years, pain intensity ≥4 on a 0- to 10-point numeric rating scale (NRS) and pain at least 4 days a week were included in the trial. A total of 262 patients were screened for participation, 73 patients were randomized, and 69 patients were included in the data analysis. The effect on average pain in comparison with placebo was: combination (-1.67 NRS points, P < 0.001), imipramine (-1.08 NRS points, P < 0.001), and pregabalin (-0.48 NRS points, P = 0.03). The combination therapy had significantly lower pain scores than both monotherapies: combination vs imipramine (P = 0.009), combination vs pregabalin (P < 0.001). During combination therapy, the dropout rate was higher and the patients reported a higher rate and severity of side effects. Combination of moderate doses of the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine and pregabalin could be considered as an alternative to high-dosage monotherapy. However, the trial also emphasized that balance between efficacy and safety is an issue.

A simple method of skin mapping for planning the operative approach in peripheral nerve injuries

BACKGROUND

The operative treatment of post-traumatic neuromas includes open exploration, excision of adhesions and/or neurectomy. Apart from the anatomical variations of the peripheral nerves and their branches' routes, nerves may be further deviated from their expected anatomical locations due to scar tissue formation. We describe a simple and reproducible method of preoperative skin marking which aids the development of an accurate surgical exposure for the localisation of a lesion.

METHOD

Skin marking is based on clinical assessment and is performed by the bedside on the day of the operation. It consists of mapping the skin with permanent marker by repeatedly using three symbols, namely √, O or X. These refer respectively to areas of normal sensation, numbness (decreased or no sensation without paraesthesia) and pain/dysaesthesia. Points with a positive Tinel sign were marked with an "X in a square". Fourteen patients, aged 21-55 years old, with post-traumatic neuromas, were marked with the method. A total of 18 neuromas were successfully located in the upper and lower limbs.

RESULTS

In all cases the preoperative skin marking corresponded to the course of the nerve and/or its branches. All patients were improved with a good to excellent clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Planning the surgical approach according to the skin marking enabled limited operative exposures and corresponded to atypical locations and branching of the peripheral nerves.