Durability of Therapeutic Response to Milnacipran Treatment for Fibromyalgia. Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Monotherapy 6-Month Extension Study

Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common in adults, and often has a detrimental impact upon physical ability, well-being, and quality of life. Previous reviews have shown that certain antidepressants may be effective in reducing pain with some benefit in improving patients' global impression of change for certain chronic pain conditions. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis (NMA) examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of antidepressants for adults with chronic pain (except headache).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases, and clinical trials registries, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions in January 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that examined antidepressants for chronic pain against any comparator. If the comparator was placebo, another medication, another antidepressant, or the same antidepressant at different doses, then we required the study to be double-blind. We included RCTs with active comparators that were unable to be double-blinded (e.g. psychotherapy) but rated them as high risk of bias. We excluded RCTs where the follow-up was less than two weeks and those with fewer than 10 participants in each arm.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors separately screened, data extracted, and judged risk of bias. We synthesised the data using Bayesian NMA and pairwise meta-analyses for each outcome and ranked the antidepressants in terms of their effectiveness using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We primarily used Confidence in Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) and Risk of Bias due to Missing Evidence in Network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN) to assess the certainty of the evidence. Where it was not possible to use CINeMA and ROB-MEN due to the complexity of the networks, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcomes were substantial (50%) pain relief, pain intensity, mood, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), serious adverse events, and withdrawal.

MAIN RESULTS

This review and NMA included 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. The majority of studies were placebo-controlled (83), and parallel-armed (141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies); neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of RCTs was 10 weeks. Seven studies provided no useable data and were omitted from the NMA. The majority of studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. In duloxetine studies, standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that of duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain.  Primary efficacy outcomes Duloxetine standard dose (60 mg) showed a small to moderate effect for substantial pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69 to 2.17; 16 studies, 4490 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and continuous pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.24; 18 studies, 4959 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For pain intensity, milnacipran standard dose (100 mg) also showed a small effect (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.06; 4 studies, 1866 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mirtazapine (30 mg) had a moderate effect on mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.22; 1 study, 406 participants; low-certainty evidence), while duloxetine showed a small effect (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.1; 26 studies, 7952 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however it is important to note that most studies excluded participants with mental health conditions, and so average anxiety and depression scores tended to be in the 'normal' or 'subclinical' ranges at baseline already. Secondary efficacy outcomes Across all secondary efficacy outcomes (moderate pain relief, physical function, sleep, quality of life, and PGIC), duloxetine and milnacipran were the highest-ranked antidepressants with moderate-certainty evidence, although effects were small. For both duloxetine and milnacipran, standard doses were as efficacious as high doses. Safety There was very low-certainty evidence for all safety outcomes (adverse events, serious adverse events, and withdrawal) across all antidepressants. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from the NMAs for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review and NMAs show that despite studies investigating 25 different antidepressants, the only antidepressant we are certain about for the treatment of chronic pain is duloxetine. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Evidence for all other antidepressants was low certainty. As RCTs excluded people with low mood, we were unable to establish the effects of antidepressants for people with chronic pain and depression. There is currently no reliable evidence for the long-term efficacy of any antidepressant, and no reliable evidence for the safety of antidepressants for chronic pain at any time point.

The Influence of Opioids on Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Effects in Women With Fibromyalgia

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) uses endogenous opioids to produce analgesia, and effectiveness can be reduced in opioid-tolerant individuals'. We examined TENS effectiveness (primary aim), and differences in fibromyalgia symptoms (secondary aim), in women with fibromyalgia regularly taking opioid (RTO) medications compared with women not- regularly taking opioids (not-RTO). Women (RTO n = 79; not-RTO not-n = 222) with fibromyalgia with daily pain levels ≥4 were enrolled and categorized into RTO (taking opioids at least 5 of 7 days in last 30 days) or not-RTO groups. Participants were categorized into tramadol n = 52 (65.8%) and other opioids n = 27 (34.2%) for the RTO group. Participants were phenotyped across multiple domains including demographics, fibromyalgia characteristics pain, fatigue, sleep, psychosocial factors, and activity. Participants were randomized to active TENS (n = 101), placebo TENS (n = 99), or no TENS (n = 99) for 1-month with randomization stratified by opioid use. Active TENS was equally effective in movement-evoked pain in those in the RTO and not-RTO groups. Women with fibromyalgia in the RTO group were older (P = .002), lower-income (P = .035), more likely to smoke (P = .014), and more likely to report depression (P = .013), hypertension (P = .005) or osteoarthritis (P = .027). The RTO group demonstrated greater bodily pain on SF-36 (P = .005), lower quality of life on the physical health component of the SF-36 (P = .040), and greater fatigue (MAF-ADL P = .047; fatigue with sit to stand test (P = .047) These differences were small of and unclear clinical significance. In summary, regular use of opioid analgesics does not interfere with the effectiveness of TENS for movement-evoked pain. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT01888640. PERSPECTIVE: Individuals treated with mixed frequency TENS at a strong but comfortable intensity that was taking prescription opioid analgesics showed a significant reduction in movement-evoked pain and fatigue. These data support the use of TENS, using appropriate parameters of stimulation, as an intervention for individuals with fibromyalgia taking opioid analgesics.

Alterations of monoamine neurotransmitters, HPA-axis hormones, and inflammation cytokines in reserpine-induced hyperalgesia and depression comorbidity rat model

BACKGROUND

Pain and depression often occur simultaneously, but the mechanism of this condition is still unclear.

METHODS

The aim of this study was to examine the alterations of monoamine neurotransmitters, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis hormones, and inflammation cytokines in hyperalgesia and depression comorbidities. The reserpine-induced "Sprague Dawley" (SD) rat models were used, and the concentrations of monoamine neurotransmitters serotonin (5-HT), norepinephrine (NE), dopamine (DA), and their metabolic products 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA), Homovanillic acid (HVA), 3,4-Dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC) in raphe nucleus region were tested by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). Serum levels of Adrenocorticotropic Hormone (ACTH), Cortisol (CORT), and inflammatory cytokines interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interferon (IFN)-γ, IL-4, IL-10 were assessed by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Repeated reserpine injection induced hyperalgesia and depressive behaviors with decreased sucrose preference and horizontal movement distance, and increased immobility time in forced swimming test. The concentrations of 5-HT and NE in raphe nucleus, and ACTH and CORT in serum were elevated in the model group. And the model group showed increases in serum IL-1β and IL-6, and decrease in serum IL-10.

CONCLUSION

More research in these areas is needed to understand the pathogenesis of the disease, so as to find more and better therapeutic targets.

Advances in the management of fibromyalgia: what is the state of the art?

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic pain syndrome associated with fatigue, insomnia, dyscognition, and emotional distress. Critical illness mechanisms include central sensitization to nociceptive and non-nociceptive stimuli often resulting in hypersensitivity to all sensory input.

AREAS COVERED

The clinical presentation of FM can vary widely and therefore requires therapies tailored to each patient's set of symptoms. This manuscript examines currently prescribed therapeutic approaches supported by empirical evidence as well as promising novel treatments. Although pharmacological therapy until now has been only moderately effective for FM symptoms, it represents a critical component of every treatment plan.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently approved pharmacological therapies for FM symptoms have limited but proven effectiveness. Novel therapies with cannabinoids and naltrexone appear promising. Recent functional imaging studies of FM have discovered multiple brain network abnormalities that may provide novel targets for mechanism-based therapies. Future treatment approaches, however, need to improve more than clinical pain but also other FM domains like fatigue, insomnia, and distress.

Comparison of Amitriptyline and US Food and Drug Administration-Approved Treatments for Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Importance

Amitriptyline is an established medication used off-label for the treatment of fibromyalgia, but pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran are the only pharmacological agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat fibromyalgia.

Objective

To investigate the comparative effectiveness and acceptability associated with pharmacological treatment options for fibromyalgia.

Data Sources

Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were conducted on November 20, 2018, and updated on July 29, 2020.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing amitriptyline or any FDA-approved doses of investigated drugs.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Four independent reviewers extracted data using a standardized data extraction sheet and assessed quality of RCTs. A random-effects bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to January 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Comparative effectiveness and acceptability (defined as discontinuation of treatment owing to adverse drug reactions) associated with amitriptyline (off-label), pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran (on-label) in reducing fibromyalgia symptoms. The following doses were compared: 60-mg and 120-mg duloxetine; 150-mg, 300-mg, 450-mg, and 600-mg pregabalin; 100-mg and 200-mg milnacipran; and amitriptyline. Effect sizes are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Findings were considered statistically significant when the 95% CrI did not include the null value (0 for SMD and 1 for OR). Relative treatment ranking using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was also evaluated.

Results

A total of 36 studies (11 930 patients) were included. The mean (SD) age of patients was 48.4 (10.4) years, and 11 261 patients (94.4%) were women. Compared with placebo, amitriptyline was associated with reduced sleep disturbances (SMD, -0.97; 95% CrI, -1.10 to -0.83), fatigue (SMD, -0.64; 95% CrI, -0.75 to -0.53), and improved quality of life (SMD, -0.80; 95% CrI, -0.94 to -0.65). Duloxetine 120 mg was associated with the highest improvement in pain (SMD, -0.33; 95% CrI, -0.36 to -0.30) and depression (SMD, -0.25; 95% CrI, -0.32 to -0.17) vs placebo. All treatments were associated with inferior acceptability (higher dropout rate) than placebo, except amitriptyline (OR, 0.78; 95% CrI, 0.31 to 1.66). According to the SUCRA-based relative ranking of treatments, duloxetine 120 mg was associated with higher efficacy for treating pain and depression, while amitriptyline was associated with higher efficacy for improving sleep, fatigue, and overall quality of life.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that clinicians should consider how treatments could be tailored to individual symptoms, weighing the benefits and acceptability, when prescribing medications to patients with fibromyalgia.

Neuroinflammation, Pain and Depression: An Overview of the Main Findings

Chronic pain is a serious public health problem with a strong affective-motivational component that makes it difficult to treat. Most patients with chronic pain suffer from severe depression; hence, both conditions coexist and exacerbate one another. Brain inflammatory mediators are critical for maintaining depression-pain syndrome and could be substrates for it. The goal of our paper was to review clinical and preclinical findings to identify the neuroinflammatory profile associated with the cooccurrence of pain and depression. In addition, we aimed to explore the regulatory effect of neuronal reorganization on the inflammatory response in pain and depression. We conducted a quantitative review supplemented by manual screening. Our results revealed inflammatory signatures in different preclinical models and clinical articles regarding depression-pain syndrome. We also identified that improvements in depressive symptoms and amelioration of pain can be modulated through direct targeting of inflammatory mediators, such as cytokines and molecular inhibitors of the inflammatory cascade. Additionally, therapeutic targets that improve and regulate the synaptic environment and its neurotransmitters may act as anti-inflammatory compounds, reducing local damage-associated molecular patterns and inhibiting the activation of immune and glial cells. Taken together, our data will help to better elucidate the neuroinflammatory profile in pain and depression and may help to identify pharmacological targets for effective management of depression-pain syndrome.

Effects of Monopolar Dielectric Radiofrequency Signals on the Symptoms of Fibromyalgia: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Monopolar dielectric radiofrequency (MDR) is a non-invasive treatment for pain based on the local application of electromagnetic signals. The study’s goal was to analyze the effects of MDR on the symptoms of fibromyalgia. For this aim, a randomized controlled trial was conducted on 66 female participants (aged 47 ± 17.7) diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Participants were randomly allocated to either an experimental group (n = 23), which received eight 20-minute sessions of MDR; a sham group, which received the same number of sessions of a sham MDR therapy (n = 22); or a control group (n = 21), which received usual care. The outcome variables included pain measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), score on the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) and quality of life measured by the combined index of fibromyalgia severity (ICAF). A large effect size was observed for the local pain (R² = 0.46), total ICAF (R² = 0.42) and ICAF physical factor scores (R² = 0.38). Significant mean differences were found for the local pain (p = 0.025) and ICAF physical factor (p = 0.031) scores of the experimental group in comparison with the sham group. No statistically significant differences between groups were found in HADS. In conclusion, MDR is more effective than either sham treatment or usual care in the short-term improvement of pain and the physical wellbeing of participants with fibromyalgia.

The molecular neurobiology of chronic pain-induced depression

The increasing number of individuals with comorbidities poses an urgent need to improve the management of patients with multiple co-existing diseases. Among these comorbidities, chronic pain and mood disorders, two long-lasting disabling conditions that significantly reduce the quality of life, could be cited first. The recent development of animal models accelerated the studies focusing on the underlying mechanisms of the chronic pain and depression/anxiety comorbidity. This review provides an overview of clinical and pre-clinical studies performed over the past two decades addressing the molecular aspects of the comorbid relationship of chronic pain and depression. We thus focused on the studies that investigated the molecular characteristics of the comorbid relationship between chronic pain and mood disorders, especially major depressive disorders, from the genetic and epigenetic point of view to key neuromodulators which have been shown to play an important role in this comorbidity.

Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.

Influence of Morphine and Naloxone on Pain Modulation in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Fibromyalgia, and Controls: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Cross-Over Study

BACKGROUND

Impaired pain inhibitory and enhanced pain facilitatory mechanisms are repeatedly reported in patients with central sensitization pain. However, the exact effects of frequently prescribed opioids on central pain modulation are still unknown.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over trial was carried out. Ten chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)/fibromyalgia (FM) patients, 11 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and 20 controls were randomly allocated to the experimental (10 mg morphine or 0.2 mg/mL Naloxone) and placebo (2 mL Aqua) group. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and temporal summation at the Trapezius and Quadriceps were assessed by algometry. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) efficacy and deep tissue pain pressure were assessed by adding ischemic occlusion at the opposite upper arm.

RESULTS

Deep tissue pain pressure was lower and temporal summation higher in CFS/FM (P = 0.002 respectively P = 0.010) and RA patients (P = 0.011 respectively P = 0.047) compared to controls at baseline. Morphine had only a positive effect on PPTs in both patient groups (P time = 0.034). Accordingly, PPTs increased after placebo (P time = 0.015), and no effects on the other pain parameters were objectified. There were no significant effects of naloxone nor nocebo on PPT, deep tissue pain, temporal summation or CPM in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed anti-hyperalgesia effects of morphine in CFS/FM and RA patients. Nevertheless, these effects were comparable to placebo. Besides, neither morphine nor naloxone influenced deep tissue pain, temporal summation or CPM. Therefore, these results suggest that the opioid system is not dominant in (enhanced) bottom-up sensitization (temporal summation) or (impaired) endogenous pain inhibition (CPM) in patients with CFS/FM or RA.

A Brief Review of the Pharmacology of Amitriptyline and Clinical Outcomes in Treating Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia is a complex chronic condition characterized by pain, physical fatigue, sleep disorder and cognitive impairment. Evidence-based guidelines recommend antidepressants as treatments of fibromyalgia where tricyclics are often considered to have the greatest efficacy, with amitriptyline often being a first-line treatment. Amitriptyline evokes a preferential reduction in pain and fatigue of fibromyalgia, and in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) score, which is a quality of life assessment. The multimodal profile of the mechanisms of action of amitriptyline include monoamine reuptake inhibition, receptor modulation and ion channel modulation. Several of the actions of amitriptyline on multiple nociceptive and sensory processes at central and peripheral locations have the potential to act cumulatively to suppress the characteristic symptoms of fibromyalgia. Greater understanding of the role of these mechanisms of action of amitriptyline could provide further clues to the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia and to a preferable pharmacological profile for future drug development.

Effect of Milnacipran on Pain in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis with Widespread Pain: A Randomized Blinded Crossover Trial

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials have shown that serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, such as milnacipran, decrease pain in noninflammatory pain conditions such as fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis. We examined the effect of milnacipran on self-reported pain intensity and experimental pain sensitivity among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with widespread pain and stable RA disease activity.

METHODS

In this double-blind, crossover study, patients with RA with widespread pain, receiving a stable treatment regimen, were randomized (by a random number generator) to receive milnacipran 50 mg twice daily or placebo for 6 weeks, followed by a 3-week washout and crossed over to the other arm for the remaining 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change in average pain intensity, assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory short form. The sample size was calculated to detect a 30% improvement in pain with power = 0.80 and α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 43 randomized subjects, 41 received the study drug, and 32 completed the 15-week study per protocol. On a 0-10 scale, average pain intensity decreased by 0.39 (95% CI -1.27 to 0.49, p = 0.37) more points during 6 weeks of milnacipran treatment compared with placebo. In the subgroup of subjects with swollen joint count ≤ 1, average pain intensity decreased by 1.14 more points during 6 weeks of milnacipran compared with placebo (95% CI -2.26 to -0.01, p = 0.04). Common adverse events included nausea (26.8%) and loss of appetite (9.7%).

CONCLUSION

Compared with placebo, milnacipran did not improve overall, self-reported pain intensity among subjects with widespread pain receiving stable RA medications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01207453.

Milnacipran for pain in fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2012. That review considered both fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain, but the efficacy of milnacipran for neuropathic pain is now dealt with in a separate review.Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine (noradrenaline) reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) that is licensed for the treatment of fibromyalgia in some countries, including Canada, Russia, and the United States.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of milnacipran for pain in fibromyalgia in adults and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE to 18 May 2015, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, and two clinical trial registries. For the earlier review, we also contacted the manufacturer.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies of eight weeks' duration or longer, comparing milnacipran with placebo or another active treatment in fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and two review authors examined issues of study quality independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new study with 100 participants for the pooled analysis. We identified two additional reports of a study using an enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal (EERW) design that included participants from earlier randomised controlled trials and an open-label study. Because this study used the same participants already included in our main analysis, and a different design, we dealt with it separately.The main analysis included six studies (five from the earlier review; 4238 participants in total), all of which were placebo-controlled, and used titration to a target dose of milnacipran 100 or 200 mg, with assessment after 8 to 24 weeks of stable treatment. There were no studies with active comparators. Study quality was generally good, although the imputation method used in analyses of the primary outcomes could overestimate treatment effect.Both doses of milnacipran provided moderate levels of pain relief (at least 30% pain intensity reduction) to about 40% of participants treated, compared to 30% with placebo, giving a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) of 6 to 10 (high quality evidence). Using a stricter definition for responder and a more conservative method of analysis gave lower levels of response (while maintaining a 10% difference between milnacipran and placebo) and increased the NNT to 11 (high quality evidence). One EERW study was broadly supportive.Adverse events were common in both milnacipran (86%) and placebo (78%) groups (high quality evidence), but serious adverse events did not differ between groups (less than 2%) (low quality evidence). Nausea, constipation, and headache were the most common events showing the greatest difference between groups (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNH) of 5.7 for nausea, 13 for constipation, and 29 for headache) (moderate quality evidence).Withdrawals for any reason were more common with milnacipran than placebo, and more common with 200 mg (NNH 9) than 100 mg (NNH 23), compared with placebo. This was largely driven by adverse event withdrawals, where the NNH compared with placebo was 14 for 100 mg and 7.0 for 200 mg (high quality evidence). Withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were less common with milnacipran than placebo but did not differ between doses (number needed to treat to prevent an additional unwanted outcome (NNTp) of 41) (moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available indicates that milnacipran 100 mg or 200 mg is effective for a minority in the treatment of pain due to fibromyalgia, providing moderate levels of pain relief (at least 30%) to about 40% of participants, compared with about 30% with placebo. There were insufficient data to assess substantial levels of pain relief (at least 50%), and the use of last observation carried forward imputation may overestimate drug efficacy. Using stricter criteria for 'responder' and a more conservative method of analysis gave lower response rates (about 26% with milnacipran versus 17% with placebo). Milnacipran was associated with increased adverse events and adverse event withdrawals, which were significantly greater for the higher dose.

An update on pharmacotherapy for the treatment of fibromyalgia

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia is a syndrome characterized by chronic generalized pain in addition to different symptoms such as fatigue, sleep disturbances, stiffness, cognitive impairment, and psychological distress. Multidisciplinary treatment combining pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies is advised.

AREAS COVERED

Publications describing randomized controlled trials and long-term extension studies evaluating drug treatment for fibromyalgia were searched in PubMed and Scopus and included in this review.

EXPERT OPINION

Different drugs are recommended for the treatment of fibromyalgia by different published guidelines, although only three of them have been approved for this indication by the US FDA, and none have been approved by the European Medicines Agency. According to the available evidence, pregabalin, duloxetine and milnacipran should be the drugs of choice for the treatment of this disease, followed by amitriptyline and cyclobenzaprine. Other drugs with at least one positive clinical trial include some selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, moclobemide, pirlindole, gabapentin, tramadol, tropisetron, sodium oxybate and nabilone. None of the currently available drugs are fully effective against the whole spectrum of fibromyalgia symptoms, namely pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances and depression, among the most relevant symptoms. Combination therapy is an option that needs to be more thoroughly investigated in clinical trials.

Effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on pain, function, and quality of life in fibromyalgia: a double-blind randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a common chronic pain condition that has a significant impact on quality of life and often leads to disability. To date, there have been few well-controlled trials assessing the utility of nonpharmacological treatment modalities such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in the management of pain and improvement in function in individuals with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study will be to complete a long-term, multicenter study to assess the effects of TENS in women with fibromyalgia.

DESIGN

This will be a phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred forty-three participants with fibromyalgia will be recruited for this study.

INTERVENTION

Participants will be randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: the intervention (TENS), placebo, or no treatment. After completing the randomized period, all participants will receive the intervention for 1 month. The participants will be asked to use TENS at the highest tolerable level for at least 2 hours daily during physical activity.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome will be pain with movement, with secondary outcomes assessing functional abilities, patient-reported outcomes, and quantitative sensory testing.

LIMITATIONS

Because having participants refrain from their typical medications is not practical, their usage and any change in medication use will be recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study will provide some of the first evidence from a large-scale, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on the effectiveness of TENS on pain control and quality-of-life changes in patients with fibromyalgia.

Efficacy of long-term milnacipran treatment in patients meeting different thresholds of clinically relevant pain relief: subgroup analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled withdrawal study

Background

Fibromyalgia patients from a long-term, open-label study of milnacipran (50–200 mg/day) were eligible to participate in a 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal study. The withdrawal study evaluated loss of therapeutic response in patients who achieved ≥50% pain improvements after receiving up to 3.25 years of milnacipran. This post-hoc analysis investigated whether patients who met lower thresholds of pain improvement also experienced worsening of fibromyalgia symptoms upon treatment withdrawal.

Method

Among patients who received milnacipran ≥100 mg/day during the long-term study, three subgroups were identified based on percentage of pain reduction at randomization: ≥50% (protocol-defined “responders”; n=150); ≥30% to <50% (patients with clinically meaningful pain improvement; n=61); and <30% (n=110). Efficacy assessments included the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQR), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI).

Results

In the ≥30 to <50% subgroup, significant worsening in pain was detected after treatment withdrawal. The difference between placebo and milnacipran in mean VAS score changes for this subgroup (+9.0, P<0.05) was similar to the difference in protocol-defined responders (+9.4, P<0.05). In the <30% subgroup, no worsening in pain was observed in either treatment arm. However, patients in this subgroup experienced significant worsening in FIQR scores after treatment withdrawal (placebo, +6.9; milnacipran, −2.8; P<0.001), as well as worsening in SF-36 PCS and BDI scores.

Conclusion

Patients who experienced ≥30% to <50% pain reduction with long-term milnacipran had significant worsening of fibromyalgia symptoms after treatment withdrawal. These results suggest that the conventional ≥30% pain responder cutoff may be adequate to demonstrate efficacy in randomized withdrawal studies of fibromyalgia. Patients in the <30% pain reduction subgroup had worsening scores on the FIQR and other multidimensional measures after treatment withdrawal, indicating the importance of identifying and managing the multiple symptoms of fibromyalgia.

Resting state connectivity correlates with drug and placebo response in fibromyalgia patients

Fibromyalgia is a chronic pain syndrome characterized by widespread pain, fatigue, and memory and mood disturbances. Despite advances in our understanding of the underlying pathophysiology, treatment is often challenging. New research indicates that changes in functional connectivity between brain regions, as can be measured by magnetic resonance imaging (fcMRI) of the resting state, may underlie the pathogenesis of this and other chronic pain states. As such, this parameter may be able to be used to monitor changes in brain function associated with pharmacological treatment, and might also be able to predict treatment response.

We performed a resting state fcMRI trial using a randomized, placebo-controlled, cross-over design to investigate mechanisms of action of milnacipran (MLN), a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), in fibromyalgia patients. Our aim was to identify functional connectivity patterns at baseline that would differentially predict treatment response to MLN as compared to placebo. Since preclinical studies of MLN suggest that this medication works by augmenting antinociceptive processes, we specifically investigated brain regions known to be involved in pain inhibition.

15 fibromyalgia patients completed the study, consisting of 6 weeks of drug and placebo intake (order counterbalanced) with an interspersed 2 week wash out period. As a main finding we report that reductions in clinical pain scores during MLN were associated with decreased functional connectivity between pro-nociceptive regions and antinociceptive pain regions at baseline, specifically between the rostral part of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the insular cortex (IC), as well as between the periaqueductal gray (PAG) and the IC: patients with lower preexisting functional connectivity had the greatest reduction in clinical pain. This pattern was not observed for the placebo period. However a more robust placebo response was associated with lower baseline functional connectivity between the ACC and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

This study indicates that ACC–IC connectivity might play a role in the mechanism of action of MLN, and perhaps more importantly fcMRI might be a useful tool to predict pharmacological treatment response.

•

Resting brain connectivity predicts clinical pain response to milnacipran.

•

Different brain connectivity patterns predicted response to placebo treatment.

•

Personalized analgesic therapy may be facilitated by brain imaging.

Milnacipran effects on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate in fibromyalgia patients: a randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize milnacipran effects on systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) in fibromyalgia patients using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM).

METHODS

This dose-escalation study included a 7-week double-blind treatment period and 2-week single-blind discontinuation period. Patients were randomized 2:1 to milnacipran (n = 210) or placebo (n = 111), with 50% of patients classified as 'hypertensive' at baseline (SBP ≥130 mmHg, DBP ≥85 mmHg, or current antihypertensive medication). Analyses were conducted at Weeks 4 and 7, after milnacipran dosages were escalated to 100 and 200 mg/day, respectively. Outcome measures included changes from baseline in mean ambulatory SBP, DBP, and heart rate for the 12-hour periods following the morning dose (post-AM dose) or evening dose (post-PM dose), and the entire 24-hour monitoring period. Primary outcome parameter was change from baseline in mean SBP for the 12-hour period post-AM dose. Safety analyses included adverse events and sitting vital sign readings taken at study visits.

RESULTS

Milnacipran increased ABPM vital signs at Week 4 (100 mg/day) and Week 7 (200 mg/day). Increases in the 12-hour period post-AM dose were similar at Weeks 4 and 7 (both visits: SBP and DBP, 4 to 5 mmHg; HR, 13 to 14 bpm). Mean increases in ambulatory vital signs were generally comparable between hypertensive and normotensive patients over 24-hour periods. Normal patterns of diurnal variation in blood pressure and heart rate were maintained in patients receiving milnacipran. Sitting vital signs were consistent with ABPM findings. Nausea was the most common adverse event observed with milnacipran.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibromyalgia patients receiving milnacipran in this ABPM study had mean increases in blood pressure and heart rate that were consistent with those observed in clinical efficacy trials. Diurnal variation was preserved and changes were not greater in hypertensive patients than in non-hypertensive patients. These findings cannot necessarily be generalized to other patient populations.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT00618956).

Fibromyalgia comorbid with anxiety disorders and depression: combined medical and psychological treatment

Fibromyalgia is associated with high level of pain and suffering. Lack of diagnosis leads to onerous indirect economic costs. Recent data indicate that fibromyalgia; anxiety disorders, and depression tend to occur as comorbid conditions. They also share some common neurochemical dysfunctions and central nervous system alterations such as hypofunctional serotonergic system and altered reactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Conversely, functional neuroimaging findings point to different patterns of altered pain processing mechanisms between fibromyalgia and depression. There is no cure for fibromyalgia, and treatment response effect size is usually small to moderate. Treatment should be based on drugs that also target the comorbid psychiatric condition. Combined pharmacotherapy and cognitive-behavior therapy should ideally be offered to all patients. Lifestyle changes, such as physical exercise should be encouraged. The message to patients should be that all forms of pain are true medical conditions and deserve proper care.

Continuing efficacy of milnacipran following long-term treatment in fibromyalgia: a randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies of long-term treatment response in fibromyalgia and other chronic pain states have generally been limited to approximately one year, leaving questions about the longer-term durability of response. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate continuing efficacy of milnacipran by characterizing changes in pain and other fibromyalgia symptoms after discontinuing long-term treatment. The mean length of milnacipran treatment at the time of randomized withdrawal was 36.1 months from initial exposure to milnacipran (range, 17.9 to 54.4 months).

METHODS

After completing a long-term, open-label, lead-in study of milnacipran (which followed varying periods of exposure in previous studies), adult patients with fibromyalgia entered the four-week open-label period of the current study for evaluation of ongoing treatment response. After the four-week period to confirm new baseline status, 151 patients taking milnacipran ≥100 mg/day and reporting ≥50% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores were classified as responders. These responders entered the 12-week, double-blind withdrawal period in which they were randomized 2:1 to continue milnacipran or switched to placebo. The prespecified primary parameter was loss of therapeutic response (LTR), defined as increase in VAS pain score to <30% reduction from pre-milnacipran exposure or worsening of fibromyalgia requiring alternative treatment. Adverse events and vital signs were also monitored.

RESULTS

Time to LTR was shorter in patients randomized to placebo than in patients continuing milnacipran (P < 0.001). Median time to LTR was 56 days with placebo and was not calculable for milnacipran, because less than half of the latter group of patients lost therapeutic response by study end. Additionally, 81% of patients continuing on milnacipran maintained clinically meaningful pain response (≥30% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure), compared with 58% of patients switched to placebo (sensitivity analysis II; P < 0.001). The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were 58% and 47% for placebo and milnacipran, respectively. Mean decreases in blood pressure and heart rate were found in both groups, with greater decreases for patients switched to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing efficacy of milnacipran was demonstrated by the loss of effect following withdrawal of treatment in patients who received an average of three years of milnacipran treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01014585.

Milnacipran for fibromyalgia: a useful addition to the treatment armamentarium

INTRODUCTION

Antidepressants are used to treat a variety of chronic pain conditions including peripheral neuropathy, headache, and more recently, fibromyalgia. The antidepressant milnacipran blocks the reuptake of norepinephrine and serotonin and is used for the management of fibromyalgia.

AREAS COVERED

The article contains data primarily obtained from the MEDLINE database using a PubMed search of the keywords including milnacipran, fibromyalgia and depression. Of the available serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, milnacipran has greater potency in inhibiting reuptake of norepinephrine relative to serotonin and is proposed to work by attenuating pain signals. Milnacipran is well tolerated and effective for fibromyalgia pain when given in divided doses of 100 - 200 mg daily. Studies show that milnacipran may be effective for fibromyalgia-associated symptoms including depression and fatigue.

EXPERT OPINION

Milnacipran provides modest fibromyalgia pain relief and is best used as part of a multidisciplinary treatment approach. While milnacipran was not studied in fibromyalgia patients with major depression, it may be a wise choice for fibromyalgia patients with depressive symptoms and patients for whom sedation, dizziness, edema or weight gain with gabapentin and pregabalin is a problem. Milnacipran has been found to be beneficial for treating some troublesome fibromyalgia-associated symptoms, including fatigue and cognitive dysfunction.

Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia syndrome

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. Patients often report high disability levels and poor quality of life (QOL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo for treating FMS symptoms in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2012), EMBASE (1980 to September 2012), www.clinicalstudyresults.org (U.S.-marketed pharmaceuticals) (to September 2012) and www.clinicaltrials.gov (to September 2012) for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo for the treatment of FMS in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data from the included studies, and assessed the risks of bias of the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies were included with a total of 6038 participants. Five studies investigated duloxetine against placebo, and five investigated milnacipran against placebo. A total of 3611 participants were included into duloxetine or milnacipran groups and 2427 participants into placebo groups. The studies had a low risk of bias in general. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a small incremental effect over placebo in reducing pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to -0.18; 6.1% relative improvement). One-hundred and ninety-two participants per 1000 on placebo reported an at least 50% pain reduction compared to 280 per 1000 on SNRIs (Risk ratio (RR) 1.49, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.64; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 9 to 15). Duloxetine and milnacipran did not reduce fatigue substantially (SMD -0.14; 95% CI -0.19 to -0.08; 2.5% relative improvement; NNTB 17, 95% CI 12 to 29), and did not improve QOL substantially (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.25 to -0.14; 4.6% relative improvement; NNTB 12, 95% CI 9 to 17) compared to placebo. There were no statistically significant differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95% CI -0.16 to 0.03; 2.5% relative improvement). One-hundred and seven participants per 1000 on placebo dropped out due to adverse events compared to 196 per 1000 on SNRIs. The dropout rate due to adverse events in the duloxetine and milnacipran groups was statistically significantly higher than in placebo groups (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.18; number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 11, 95% CI 9 to 13). There was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.12).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided a small incremental benefit over placebo in reducing pain. The superiority of duloxetine and milnacipran over placebo in reducing fatigue and limitations of QOL was not substantial. Duloxetine and milnacipran were not superior to placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. The most frequently reported symptoms leading to stopping medication were nausea, dry mouth, constipation, headache, somnolence/dizziness and insomnia. Rare complications of both drugs may include suicidality, liver damage, abnormal bleeding, elevated blood pressure and urinary hesitation.

Effect of milnacipran on body weight in patients with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of milnacipran on body weight in patients with fibromyalgia.

METHODS

ANALYSES WERE CONDUCTED IN THE FOLLOWING GROUPS: patients from three double-blind, placebo-controlled milnacipran trials (3 months, n = 2096; 6 months, n = 1008); 354 patients receiving milnacipran in placebo-controlled trials and double-blind extension studies (total ≥ 12 months of treatment); and 1227 patients in a long-term (up to 3.25 years) open-label milnacipran study.

RESULTS

In placebo-controlled trials, 77% of patients were overweight or obese at baseline (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m(2)). Mean weight loss was found with milnacipran at 3 months (100 mg/day, -1.14 kg; 200 mg/day, -0.97 kg; placebo, -0.06 kg; P < 0.001) and 6 months (100 mg/day, -1.01 kg; 200 mg/day, -0.71 kg; placebo, -0.04 kg; P < 0.05). Approximately twice as many milnacipran-treated patients had ≥5% weight loss from baseline compared with placebo (3 and 6 months, P < 0.01). In extension studies, mean weight loss in patients receiving ≥12 months of milnacipran was -1.06 kg. In patients receiving ≥3 years of treatment in the open-label study, mean changes at 12, 24, 30, and 36-38 months were -1.16, -0.76, -0.19, and +0.11 kg, respectively. Among milnacipran-treated patients, rates of nausea (the most common adverse event) were lower among patients who lost weight than among those who did not (3 months, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with fibromyalgia in the milnacipran studies were overweight or obese. Milnacipran was associated with mean weight loss at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.05 versus placebo) and at 12 and 24 months of treatment, with mean changes drifting back to baseline at 30 months (-0.19 kg) and 36-38 months (+0.11 kg, no placebo comparison).

Pharmacotherapy of fibromyalgia

There have been substantial advances in the pharmacotherapy of fibromyalgia (FM), which have occurred in parallel with advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of FM in the past several years. Consortia of researchers have established a core set of symptom domains, which constitute the condition of FM, including pain, fatigue, sleep and mood disturbance and cognitive dysfunction, which significantly impact a patient's overall well-being and ability to function. Outcome measures, which assess these domains, both singly and in composite format, are showing increasing reliability to discriminate between the treatment and placebo arms in clinical trials of emerging therapies, which are targeting the pathophysiologic mechanisms of FM. Several different medications, including the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, duloxetine and milnacipran, and the α(2)δ modulator, pregabalin, have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of FM, based on their clinically meaningful and durable effect on pain in monotherapy trials. They also have been shown to beneficially effect patient global impression of change, function and variably other key symptom domains, such as fatigue, sleep disturbance and cognition. Other medicines, although they have not gone through the formal approval process, have also shown efficacy in multiple domains of FM. Although combination trials have generally not yet been performed, the combined use of medicines with complementary mechanisms of action is rational, and, when done with appropriate caution, will likely be shown to be safe and well tolerated. Adjunctive therapy with medicines targeted at specific symptom domains, such as sleep, as well as treatments aimed at common co-morbid conditions, such as irritable bowel syndrome, or disease states, such as rheumatoid arthritis, should be considered for the purpose of reducing the patient's overall symptom burden. Current therapies neither completely treat FM symptoms nor benefit all patients; thus, further research on new therapies with different mechanisms and side-effect profiles is needed.

Milnacipran for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) that is sometimes used to treat chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of milnacipran in the management of chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE to 4th of January 2012, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies of eight weeks duration or longer, comparing milnacipran with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and two study authors examined issues of study quality independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies (4138 participants) were included, all of which were placebo-controlled, involved participants with fibromyalgia, and used titration to a target dose of 100 mg or 200 mg milnacipran. There were no other active comparators or studies in other neuropathic pain conditions. Study quality was generally good, although the imputation method used in analyses of the primary outcomes could overestimate treatment effect.Both doses of milnacipran provided moderate levels of pain relief to about 40% of those treated, compared to 30% with placebo, giving a number needed to treat of 8 to 10. Adverse events were common in both milnacipran (87%) and placebo (78%) groups, but serious adverse events (< 2%) did not differ between groups. Nausea and constipation were the most common events showing the greatest difference between groups (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome of 7 and 13 respectively, compared with placebo).Withdrawals for any reason were more common with milnacipran than placebo, and more common with 200 mg than 100 mg (NNH of 23 and 8.8 respectively, compared with placebo). This was largely driven by adverse event withdrawals, where the NNH compared with placebo was 14 for 100 mg, and 7.0 for 200 mg). Withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were more common with milnacipran than placebo but did not differ between doses (number needed to treat to prevent an additional unwanted outcome of 45 and 41 respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available indicates that milnacipran 100 mg or 200 mg is effective for a minority in the treatment of pain due to fibromyalgia, providing moderate levels of pain relief (at least 30%) to about 40% of participants, compared with about 30% with placebo. There were insufficient data to assess substantial levels of pain relief (at least 50%), and the use of last observation carried forward imputation may overestimate drug efficacy. Milnacipran is associated with increased adverse events and adverse event withdrawals, which were significantly greater for the higher dose. There were no data for the use of milnacipran for other chronic neuropathic pain conditions.

Fibromyalgia: from pathophysiology to therapy

Individuals with fibromyalgia generally experience chronic widespread pain, which can be accompanied by further symptoms including fatigue, sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction, anxiety and depressive episodes. As the recognition and diagnosis of fibromyalgia has improved, the availability of therapeutic options for patients has increased. Furthermore, research into the neurobiological mechanisms that contribute to the chronic pain and concomitant symptoms experienced by patients with fibromyalgia has advanced our understanding of this debilitating disorder. In this Review, we aim to provide an overview of existing pathophysiological concepts. The roles of biological and psychological stress, genetic factors, and pain and sensory processing in the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia and related conditions are discussed. In addition, pharmacological treatments, including monoamine modulators, calcium channel modulators and γ-aminobutyric acid modulators, as well as nonpharmacological treatment options are considered.

Longterm Therapeutic Response to Milnacipran Treatment for Fibromyalgia. A European 1-Year Extension Study Following a 3-Month Study

Objective.

This double-blind, 1-year extension study investigated the longterm efficacy and safety of milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) in completers of a 3-month European double-blind lead-in study of milnacipran 200 mg/day versus placebo.

Methods.

A total of 468 patients with FM successfully completing the lead-in study were either blindly maintained on milnacipran 200 mg/day (MLN200:MLN200, n = 198) or (if previously receiving placebo) rerandomized to milnacipran 100 mg/day (PBO:MLN100, n = 91), 150 mg/day (PBO:MLN150, n = 92), or 200 mg/day (PBO:MLN200, n = 87) for an additional 12 months (including a 4-week dose escalation). The main efficacy endpoint was a 2-measure composite responder rate (relative to lead-in study baseline) incorporating the weekly-recall pain score recorded on a visual analog scale and the Patient Global Impression of Change score. A panel of other assessments including the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire explored the multidimensional aspects of FM. Descriptive analyses using the last observation carried forward approach were performed.

Results.

At the 1-year endpoint, the proportion of composite responders (relative to the lead-in study baseline) ranged from 27.5% (PBO:MLN100) to 35.9% (MLN200:MLN200), and had increased from the extension study baseline by 15.2% (PBO:MLN150) to 20.7% (PBO:MLN200 and MLN200:MLN200). At endpoint, an improvement from both baselines was shown in all groups on pain, fatigue, sleep, and quality of life measures. Up to 1 year, all doses of milnacipran were safe and well tolerated. The most common drug-related adverse events were hyperhidrosis and nausea.

Conclusion.

Over 1 year, milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day exhibited sustained and safe therapeutic effects on predominant symptoms of FM. Registered as trial no.NCT00757731.

Pharmacotherapy for fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic disorder characterized by multifocal pain and other associated somatic symptoms including fatigue, insomnia, cognitive/memory problems, and even psychological distress. It appears that 2–4% of the general population suffers from FM. FM negatively impacts the physical functioning of its patients, as evidenced by difficulties with multiple daily activities, as well as affecting emotional health, social functioning, and health related quality of life. This review will discuss the potential theories that possibly contribute to the pathogenesis of FM, although the precise mechanism is unknown. The evolution of the assessment of FM will also be examined, with the waning use of tender point examinations and the appearance of new simple, practical diagnostic criteria. Although non-pharmacologic therapeutic options (exercise, education, cognitive–behavioral therapy) have been shown to be extremely effective in FM, the focus of this article will be on pharmacologic strategies. Non-Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved as well as FDA approved agents will be presented. Each agent's therapeutic “niche” in FM management will be discussed based on its pharmacologic profile, patient responsiveness, and tolerability. Finally a clinical algorithm will be presented for the step-wise management of pain and other associated symptoms of FM.

New Drug Approvals: Milnacipran for Treatment of Fibromyalgia

Objective:

To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of milnacipran and evaluate relevant clinical trial data.

Data Sources:

MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Google Scholar searches (1966-June 2010) were conducted using the key words fibromyalgia, milnacipran, and serolonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. Searches were limited to articles published in English.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All available English-language articles of human studies were evaluated. One pharmacokinetic study reviewed included animal data. References cited in identified articles were used for additional evaluation.

Data Synthesis:

Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor with a 3-fotd increased selectivity for norepinephrine compared to serotonin. It is well absorbed with 85-90% bioavailability. Maximum concentrations are achieved 2-4 hours after administration. Milnacipran does not undergo cytochrome P450 metabolism and has a half-life of 6-8 hours. Fifty-five percent of each dose is excreted unchanged in the urine. Dose adjustment is needed in patients with an estimated creatinine clearance of <30 mL/min. Clinical trials indicated that twice-daily dosing at 100 mg/day or 200 mg/day was superior to single-daily dosing. Studies further established the effectiveness of both doses in the treatment of fibromyalgia pain utilizing patient self-reported pain scores, as well as on a visual analog scale, Patient Global Impression of Change scale, and the Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary, A 6-month extension trial, which evaluated patients continued on milnacipran for up to 1 year, demonstrated continued pain relief. The most common adverse drug reaction associated with milnacipran was nausea, which was reduced with slow-dose titration and administrai ion with food.

Conclusions:

Milnacipran is an effective treatment option for patients with fibromyalgia. More head-to-head clinical trials are necessary to assess its ultimate place in therapy.

Milnacipran: a selective serotonin and norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor for the management of fibromyalgia

Milnacipran, a serotonin and norepinephrfrine reuptake inhibitor with preferential inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake over serotonin, is approved in the United States for the management of fibromyalgia. Owing to its effects on norepinephrine and serotonin, as well as its lack of activity at other receptor systems, it was hypothesized that milnacipran would provide improvements in pain and other fibromyalgia symptoms without some of the unpleasant side effects associated with other medications historically used for treating fibromyalgia. The clinical safety and efficacy of milnacipran 100 and 200 mg/day in individuals with fibromyalgia has been investigated in four large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and three long-term extension studies. The clinical studies used composite responder analyses to identify the proportion of individual patients reporting simultaneous and clinically significant improvements in pain, global status, and physical function, in addition to assessing improvement in various symptom domains such as fatigue and dyscognition. In the clinical studies, patients receiving milnacipran reported significant improvements in pain and other symptoms for up to 15 months of treatment. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and were related to the intrinsic pharmacologic properties of the drug. Long-term exposure to milnacipran did not result in any new safety concerns. As with other serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, increases in heart rate and blood pressure have been observed in some patients with milnacipran treatment.

New and emerging therapeutic agents for the treatment of fibromyalgia: an update

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic widespread pain condition that is estimated to affect 5 million US adults. Several molecular pathophysiologies are thought to contribute to the symptoms of FM, complicating the development of effective clinical management techniques. It is now known that abnormalities in both nociceptive and central pain processing systems are necessary (but perhaps not sufficient) to condition the onset and maintenance of FM, producing associated neuropsychologic symptoms such as pronounced fatigue, sleep abnormalities, cognitive difficulties, stress sensitivity, anxiety, and depression. Current treatment strategies are focused primarily on correcting the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying these nervous system abnormalities. Clinical studies demonstrate the safety and efficacy of three drugs recently approved for the treatment of FM: pregabalin (an alpha-2-delta ligand), and duloxetine and milnacipran (serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors). This review describes these pharmaceuticals in detail and discusses their current roles in FM management.

Fibromyalgia syndrome: a discussion of the syndrome and pharmacotherapy

Fibromyalgia is a complex condition that is characterized by chronic widespread pain and multiple other symptoms, including fatigue, sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction, stiffness, and depressive episodes. Fibromyalgia may coexist and/or overlap with other conditions that may involve central sensitivity, including chronic fatigue syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, irritable bladder syndrome or interstitial cystitis, and temporomandibular disorder. The pathophysiology of fibromyalgia remains uncertain but is believed to be partly the result of central systems affecting afferent processing as well as impaired endogenous pain-inhibitory systems. Abnormal central nociceptive processing may contribute to fibromyalgia, producing heightened responses to various noxious stimuli with resulting mechanical hyperalgesia. Fibromyalgia remains a clinical diagnosis. There has been a recent paradigm shift away from requiring 11 or more out of 18 tender points and instead focusing on the presence of chronic widespread pain as well as symptoms of fatigue, unrefreshed sleep, and other somatic complaints. Although there is no known cure for fibromyalgia, multidisciplinary team efforts using combined treatment approaches, including patient education, aerobic exercise, cognitive behavioral therapy, and pharmacologic therapies (serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [eg, duloxetine, milnacipran] and alpha 2-delta receptor ligands [eg, pregabalin]) may improve symptoms as well as function of patients with fibromyalgia.

Role and rationale for the use of milnacipran in the management of fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex syndrome characterized by chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain which is often accompanied by multiple other symptoms, including fatigue, sleep disturbances, decreased physical functioning, and dyscognition. Due to these multiple symptoms, as well as high rates of comorbidity with other related disorders, patients with FM often report a reduced quality of life. Although the pathophysiology of FM is not completely understood, patients with FM experience pain differently from the general population, most likely due to dysfunctional pain processing in the central nervous system leading to both hyperalgesia and allodynia. In many patients with FM, this aberrant pain processing, or central sensitization, appears to involve decreased pain inhibition within the spinal tract, which is mediated by descending pathways that utilize serotonin, norepinephrine, and other neurotransmitters. The reduced serotonin and norepinephrine levels observed in patients with FM suggest that medications which increase the levels of these neurotransmitters, such as serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), may have clinically beneficial effects in FM and other chronic pain conditions. Milnacipran is an SNRI that has been approved for the management of FM. In clinical trials, treatment with milnacipran for up to 1 year has been found to improve the pain and other symptoms of FM. Because FM is characterized by multiple symptoms that all contribute to the decreased quality of life and ability to function, the milnacipran pivotal trials implemented responder analyses. These utilized a single composite endpoint to identify the proportion of patients who reported simultaneous and clinically significant improvements in pain, global disease status, and physical function. Other domains assessed during the milnacipran trials include fatigue, multidimensional functioning, mood, sleep quality, and patient-reported dyscognition. This review article provides information intended to help clinicians make informed decisions about the use of milnacipran in the clinical management of patients with FM. It draws primarily on results from 2 of the pivotal clinical trials that formed the basis of approval of milnacipran in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration.

A European Multicenter Randomized Double-blind Placebo-controlled Monotherapy Clinical Trial of Milnacipran in Treatment of Fibromyalgia

Objective.

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study investigated the efficacy and safety of milnacipran in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) in a European population.

Methods.

Outpatients diagnosed with FM according to 1990 American College of Rheumatology criteria (N = 884) were randomized to placebo (n = 449) or milnacipran 200 mg/day (n = 435) for 17 weeks (4-week dose escalation, 12-week stable dose, 9-day down-titration), followed by a 2-week posttreatment period. The primary efficacy criterion was a 2-measure composite responder analysis requiring patients to achieve simultaneous improvements in pain (≥ 30% improvement from baseline in visual analog scale, 24-hour morning recall) and a rating of “very much” or “much” improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale. If responder analysis was positive, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) was included as an additional key primary efficacy measure.

Results.

At the end of the stable dose period (Week 16), milnacipran 200 mg/day showed significant improvements from baseline relative to placebo in the 2-measure composite responder criteria (p = 0.0003) and FIQ total score (p = 0.015). Significant improvements were also observed in multiple secondary efficacy endpoints, including Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (p = 0.025), SF-36 Mental Component Summary (p = 0.007), Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (p = 0.006), and Multiple Ability Self-Report Questionnaire (p = 0.041). Milnacipran was safe and well tolerated; nausea, hyperhidrosis, and headache were the most common adverse events.

Conclusion.

Milnacipran is an effective and safe treatment for pain and other predominant symptoms of FM. Registered as trial no. NCT00436033.