Off-label, low-dose naltrexone for refractory chronic low back pain

A Utilization Review of Patients That Respond to Low-Dose Naltrexone (LDN) for Chronic Pain at a Single Institution

Studies have demonstrated the benefits of LDN for various pain indications. This review describes the utilization of and response to LDN in patients with chronic pain within the William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital (Madison VA). This was a retrospective, single center, chart review of patients that were prescribed LDN for chronic pain. The primary outcome, change in subjective pain report via numeric rating scale (NRS), was analyzed through Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test and descriptive statistics. A total of 136 participants were included. Patients had an average pain score of 7.1 per NRS at baseline. At the initial follow up visit, participants had an average pain of 6.4 (p < 0.001). Additionally, 17.1% of patients had a greater than or equal to 30% pain reduction from baseline. At subsequent follow up, patients reported an average pain of 5.5 (p < 0.0001) per NRS. At the end of the study, 31.6% of patients were maintained on LDN at an average dose of 3.8 mg. This retrospective review demonstrated that LDN may be an effective modality for some chronic pain indications. Reported pain scores were significantly lower at initial follow up compared to baseline for the total population, and for patients with fibromyalgia (FM) specifically.

Low-dose naltrexone's utility for non-cancer centralized pain conditions: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

At low doses, naltrexone (LDN) has been shown to modulate inflammation through the interruption of microglial cell activation within the central nervous system. One of the most likely contributors to centralized pain is changes in microglial cell processing. Therefore, it has been postulated that LDN can be used to manage patients with pain resulting from central sensitization due to this relationship. This scoping review aims to synthesize the relevant study data for LDN as a novel treatment strategy for various centralized pain conditions.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar, guided by the Scale for Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) criteria.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies related to centralized pain conditions were identified. Many of the studies were case reports/series and narrative reviews, but a few randomized control trials have been conducted. Overall, the body of evidence revealed improvement in patient-reported pain severity and in outcomes related to hyperalgesia, physical function, quality of life, and sleep. Variability in dosing paradigms and the time to patient response was present in the reviewed studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence synthesized for this scoping review supports the ongoing use of LDN for the treatment of refractory pain in various centralized chronic pain conditions. Upon review of the currently available published studies, it is apparent that further high-quality, well-powered randomized control trials need to be conducted to establish efficacy, standardization for dosing, and response times. In summary, LDN continues to offer promising results in the management of pain and other distressing symptoms in patients with chronic centralized pain conditions.

Pilot Study of Low-Dose Naltrexone for the Treatment of Chronic Pain Due to Arthritis: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is commonly used to control pain and other symptoms, especially in patients with autoimmune diseases, but with limited evidence. This study tests the efficacy of LDN in reducing chronic pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and inflammatory arthritis (IA), where existing approaches often fail to adequately control pain.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial, each patient received 4.5 mg LDN for 8 weeks and placebo for 8 weeks. Outcome measures were patient reported, using validated questionnaires. The primary outcome was differences in pain interference during the LDN and placebo periods, using the Brief Pain Inventory (scale, 0-70). Secondary outcomes included changes in mean pain severity, fatigue, depression, and multiple domains of health-related quality of life. The painDETECT questionnaire classified pain as nociceptive, neuropathic, or mixed. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects models.

FINDINGS

Seventeen patients with OA and 6 with IA completed the pilot study. Most patients described their pain as nociceptive (n = 9) or mixed (n = 8) rather than neuropathic (n = 3). There was no difference in change in pain interference after treatment with LDN (mean [SD], -23 [19.4]) versus placebo (mean [SD], -22 [19.2]; P = 0.90). No significant differences were seen in pain severity, fatigue, depression, or health-related quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS

In this small pilot study, findings do not support LDN being efficacious in reducing nociceptive pain due to arthritis. Too few patients were enrolled to rule out modest benefit or to assess inflammatory or neuropathic pain.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier: NCT03008590.

Baseline- and treatment-associated pain in the X:BOT comparative effectiveness study of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine-naloxone for OUD

Chronic pain is highly prevalent among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, little is known about how pharmacological treatments for OUD, for example, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), affect pain. To begin addressing this question, we performed a secondary analysis of pain data on a large prospective 24-week, open-label, randomized-controlled comparative effectiveness trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX (X:BOT trial). Participants' pain status was measured by the EuroQol (EQ-5D). Based on their responses to the pain question at baseline, participants were dichotomized into "Pain" versus "No Pain" categories. Participant's pain status was evaluated every 4 weeks. A mixed effects longitudinal logistic regression model was fitted to examine the differential effect of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX on pain, modelling pain at all available follow-up assessments, adjusted for age, sex, and baseline pain. A total of 474 individuals who were successfully inducted onto their assigned medications were included in this analysis. Among participants endorsing pain at baseline, substantial reductions in pain were observed over the course of the study in both treatment groups. Howecver reduction in pain was slightly greater in the group treated with XR-NTX than the one treated with BUP-NX (OR = 1.60 [95% CI: 1.07-2.40], P = 0.023). Future research using instruments and design specifically focused on pain could extend the present observations and evaluate their clinical significance.

Low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of fibromyalgia: protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is used widely as an off-label treatment for pain despite limited evidence for its effectiveness. A few small trials with a high risk of bias have investigated the effect of LDN on pain associated with fibromyalgia in women, but larger and more methodologically robust studies are needed. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to investigate if 12 weeks of LDN treatment is superior to placebo in reducing the average pain intensity during the last 7 days in women with fibromyalgia.

METHODS

A single-center, permuted block randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial will be performed in Denmark. Randomization comprises 100 women aged 18-64 years diagnosed with fibromyalgia who will be treated with either LDN or placebo for 12 weeks including a 4-week titration phase. The primary outcome is change in average pain intensity (during the last 7 days) from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are other fibromyalgia-related symptoms, i.e., tenderness, fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, memory problems, depression, anxiety and measures of global assessment, physical function, impact of fibromyalgia, pain distribution, and health-related quality of life. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, and the number of responders with a more than 15%, 30%, and 50% improvement of pain after 12 weeks will be calculated for the LDN and placebo groups. Exploratory outcomes include measures of pain sensitivity, muscle performance, and biomarkers.

DISCUSSION

This study will contribute with high-level evidence on the efficacy of low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of pain in women with fibromyalgia. Secondary outcomes include both disease-specific and generic components investigating whether LDN influences other symptoms than pain. Explorative outcomes are included to provide greater insight into the mechanism of action of LDN and possibly a better understanding of the underlying pathology in fibromyalgia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT 2019-000702-30. Registered on 12 July 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04270877. Registered on 17 February 2020.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose naltrexone in painful diabetic neuropathy: A randomized, double-blind, active-control, crossover clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There is a need for newer therapies for chronic painful diabetic neuropathy as the existing drugs have their own limitations. Clinical trials on low-dose naltrexone (1-5 mg/d) showed efficacy and safety in certain chronic painful conditions, but not in painful diabetic neuropathy. Hence the present study was planned.

METHODS

Sixty-seven participants with painful diabetic neuropathy were randomized to receive either 2 mg naltrexone or 10 mg amitriptyline daily following a 2-week run-in period. The participants were followed up every 2 weeks for a total of 6 weeks. Up-titration was done (to 4 mg naltrexone or 25/50 mg amitriptyline) if the pain reduction was less than 20% on the visual analog scale (VAS) during the next follow-up visit. Efficacy was assessed using the change in VAS score at the end of 6 weeks from baseline. Safety was evaluated at each follow-up visit. After 2 weeks of washout period, the participants were crossed over to receive the comparator drug for another 6 weeks with similar evaluations.

RESULTS

The difference (confidence interval) in the change in VAS score between groups from baseline was 1.64 (-0.92 to 4.20) in per-protocol analysis and 1.5 (-1.11 to 4.13) in intention-to-treat analysis. Eight and fifty-two adverse events were reported in the naltrexone and amitriptyline groups, respectively (P < .001). The most common adverse events were mild diarrhea with naltrexone and somnolence with amitriptyline.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose naltrexone exhibited similar efficacy and a superior safety profile compared with amitriptyline in painful diabetic neuropathy.

Reported Benefits of Low-Dose Naltrexone Appear to Be Independent of the Endogenous Opioid System Involving Proopiomelanocortin Neurons and β-Endorphin

Naltrexone is an opioid receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of alcohol and opioid use disorders at doses of 50–150 mg/d. Naltrexone has also been prescribed at much lower doses (3–6 mg/d) for the off-label treatment of inflammation and pain. Currently, a compelling mechanistic explanation for the reported efficacy of low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is lacking and none of the proposed mechanisms can explain patient reports of improved mood and sense of well-being. Here, we examined the possibility that LDN might alter the activity of the endogenous opioid system involving proopiomelanocortin (POMC) neurons in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus (ARH) in male and female mice. Known actions of POMC neurons could account for changes in pain perception and mood. However, using electrophysiologic, imaging and peptide measurement approaches, we found no evidence for such a mechanism. LDN did not change the sensitivity of opioid receptors regulating POMC neurons, the production of the β-endorphin precursor Pomc mRNA, nor the release of β-endorphin into plasma. Spontaneous postsynaptic currents (sPSCs) onto POMC neurons were slightly decreased after LDN treatment and GCaMP fluorescent signal, a proxy for intracellular calcium levels, was slightly increased. However, LDN treatment did not appear to change POMC neuron firing rate, resting membrane potential, nor action potential threshold. Therefore, LDN appears to have only slight effects on POMC neurons that do not translate to changes in intrinsic excitability or baseline electrical activity and mechanisms beyond POMC neurons and altered opioid receptor sensitivity should continue to be explored.

Low-dose naltrexone is effective and well-tolerated for modulating symptoms in patients with neuropathic corneal pain

PURPOSE

Neuropathic corneal pain (NCP) is caused by damage or disease of the somatosensory nervous system that innervates the cornea and presents with symptoms of pain or persistent unpleasant sensations, such as burning, dryness, or light sensitivity. This retrospective study aims to assess the efficacy and tolerability of low-dose naltrexone (LDN) in refractory NCP patients.

METHODS

Fifty-nine NCP patients with a centralized component treated with oral LDN 4.5  mg at bedtime for at least four weeks were identified. Thirty out of 59 patients who had a baseline pain score ≥4 on the visual analogue scale had completed the ocular pain assessment survey (OPAS) and presented persistent pain, despite instillation of topical anesthetic drops, were included. Changes in pain scores, comorbidities, side effects, among others, were analyzed. Change in ocular pain scores (scale 0-10) and quality of life (QoL) scores (scale 0-100%) were the main endpoints.

RESULTS

Mean age (years ± SD) was 45.60 ± 19.30 with a white (80.00%) female (73.33%) predominance. Duration of LDN use was 14.87 ± 11.25 months, and the duration of NCP before treatment was 17.53 ± 17.29 months. Eight patients used LDN as a monotherapy, whereas the remaining used it as an adjunct therapy. LDN resulted in a 49.22% decrease in mean pain score from 6.13 ± 1.93 to 3.23 ± 2.60 (p < 0.001). Mean QoL scores by the OPAS were 5.84 ± 2.57 at the first visit and improved to 3.77 ± 2.91 at the last visit (p = 0.023). Common side effects were vivid dreams, headaches, and stomachache.

CONCLUSION

LDN was effective and well-tolerated for NCP treatment.

Low-Dose Naltrexone for the Treatment of Fibromyalgia: Investigation of Dose–Response Relationships

Objective

This study explores dose–response relationships when treating fibromyalgia with low-dose naltrexone.

Design

A single-blinded clinical trial was carried out using the “up-and-down” method.

Subjects

Subjects included women with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia aged 18–60 years who had been referred to treatment at a public pain clinic at a Danish university hospital.

Methods

The test doses were in the range 0.75–6 mg, and the dosing interval was 0.75 mg. The method was sequential and allowed predicting the dose effective in 50% (ED50) and 95% (ED95) of the subjects when the dose had shifted direction 10 times, and six pairs of “up-and-down” data were available.

Results

A total of 27 subjects were included in the study; two subjects were withdrawn. After inclusion of 25 evaluable subjects, the dose estimates were calculated as 3.88 mg for ED50 and 5.40 mg for ED95. As a secondary outcome, the effects on 10 common fibromyalgia symptoms were evaluated. A high interindividual variation was observed both in the symptom presentation at baseline and in which symptoms were reduced by low-dose naltrexone.

Conclusions

This study is the first to explore dose–response relationships in the treatment of fibromyalgia with low-dose naltrexone. Future placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials are needed, and according to our findings, 4.5 mg, which has previously been used, seems to be a relevant test dose. We recommend that future studies include additional nonpain fibromyalgia symptoms as outcome measures.

Are Opioids Needed to Treat Chronic Low Back Pain? A Review of Treatment Options and Analgesics in Development

The continued prevalence of chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a testament to our lack of understanding of the potential causes, leading to significant treatment challenges. CLBP is the leading cause of years lived with disability and the fifth leading cause of disability-adjusted life-years. No single non-pharmacologic, pharmacologic, or interventional therapy has proven effective as treatment for the majority of patients with CLBP. Although non-pharmacologic therapies are generally helpful, they are often ineffective as monotherapy and many patients lack adequate access to these treatments. Noninvasive treatment measures supported by evidence include physical and chiropractic therapy, yoga, acupuncture, and non-opioid and opioid pharmacologic therapy; data suggest a moderate benefit, at most, for any of these therapies. Until our understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment of CLBP advances, clinicians must continue to utilize rational multimodal treatment protocols. Recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for opioid prescribing recommend that opioids not be utilized as first-line therapy and to limit the doses when possible for fear of bothersome or dangerous adverse effects. In combination with the current opioid crisis, this has caused providers to minimize or eliminate opioid therapy when treating patients with chronic pain, leaving many patients suffering despite optimal nonopioid therapies. Therefore, there remains an unmet need for effective and tolerable opioid receptor agonists for the treatment of CLBP with improved safety properties over legacy opioids. There are several such agents in development, including opioids and other agents with novel mechanisms of action. This review critiques non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment modalities for CLBP and examines the potential of novel opioids and other analgesics that may be a useful addition to the treatment options for patients with chronic pain.

Pharmacology Update: Low-Dose Naltrexone as a Possible Nonopioid Modality for Some Chronic, Nonmalignant Pain Syndromes

Pain can have a devastating effect on the quality of life of patients in palliative medicine. Thus far, majority of research has been centered on opioid-based pain management, with a limited empirical evidence for the use of nonopioid medications in palliative care. However, opioid and nonopioid medications such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have their limitations in the clinical use due to risk of adverse effects, therefore, there is a need for more research to be directed to finding an alternative approach to pain management in comfort care setting. The purpose of this article is to discuss a potential new drug that would adequately alleviate pain and enhance quality of life without significant risks of adverse effects that would limit its use. Naltrexone is a reversible competitive antagonist at μ-opioid and κ-opioid receptors, which when used at standard doses of 50 to 150 mg was initially intended for use in opioid and alcohol use disorders. However, it was discovered that its use in low doses follows alternate pharmacodynamic pathways with various effects. When used in doses of 1 to 5 mg it acts as a glial modulator with a neuroprotective effect via inhibition of microglial activation. It binds to Toll-like receptor 4 and acts as an antagonist, therefore inhibiting the downstream cellular signaling pathways that ultimately lead to pro-inflammatory cytokines, therefore reducing inflammatory response. Its other mode of action involves transient opioid receptor blockade ensuing from low-dose use which upregulates opioid signaling resulting in increased levels of endogenous opioid production, known as opioid rebound effect. Low dose naltrexone has gained popularity as an off-label treatment of several autoimmune diseases including multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease, as well as chronic pain disorders including fibromyalgia, complex regional pain syndrome, and diabetic neuropathy. Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) may also have utility in improving mood disorders and the potential to enhance the quality of life. This article will therefore propose the potential off-label use of LDN in management of nonmalignant pain in the palliative medicine setting.

Low-dose naltrexone and opioid consumption: a drug utilization cohort study based on data from the Norwegian prescription database

PURPOSE

Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is used in a wide range of conditions, including chronic pain and fibromyalgia. Because of the opioid antagonism of naltrexone, LDN users are probably often warned against concomitant use with opioids. In this study, based on data from the Norwegian prescription database, we examine changes in opioid consumption after starting LDN therapy.

METHODS

We included all Norwegian patients (N = 3775) with at least one recorded LDN prescription in 2013 and at least one dispensed opioid prescription during the 365 days preceding the first LDN prescription. We allocated the patients into three subgroups depending on the number of collected LDN prescriptions and recorded the number of defined daily doses (DDDs) on collected prescriptions on opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other analgesics and antipyretics from the same patients.

RESULTS

Among the patients collecting ≥4 LDN prescriptions, annual average opioid consumption was reduced by 41 DDDs per person (46%) compared with that of the previous year. The reduction was 12 DDDs per person (15%) among users collecting two to three prescriptions and no change among those collecting only one LDN prescription. We observed no increase in the number of DDDs in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or other analgesics and antipyretics corresponding to the decrease in opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

Possibly, LDN users avoided opioids because of warnings on concomitant use or the patients continuing on LDN were less opioid dependent than those terminating LDN. Therapeutic effects of LDN contributing to lower opioid consumption cannot be ruled out. © 2017 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.