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

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.

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.

Effects of Wearable Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterized by widespread pain and interference with daily activities. The aim of this study is to assess the benefit of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for persons diagnosed with fibromyalgia.

Patients and Methods

Adults meeting diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized in a double-blind trial to receive either an active (n=62) or sham (n=57) wearable TENS device for 3-months. Subjects were classified as having lower or higher pain sensitivity by Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST). Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC, primary outcome) and secondary efficacy measures including Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) were assessed at baseline, 6-weeks and 3-months. Treatment effects were determined by a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N=119). A pre-specified subgroup analysis of pain sensitivity was conducted using an interaction term in the model.

Results

No differences were found between active and sham treatment on PGIC scores at 3-months (0.34, 95% CI [−0.37, 1.04], p=0.351) in the ITT population. However, in subjects with higher pain sensitivity (n=60), PGIC was significantly greater for active treatment compared to sham (1.19, 95% CI [0.24, 2.13], p=0.014). FIQR total score (−7.47, 95% CI [−12.46, −2.48], p=0.003), FIQR pain item (−0.62, 95% CI [−1.17, −0.06], p=0.029), BPI Interference (−0.70, 95% CI [−1.30, −0.11], p=0.021) and PDQ (−1.69, 95% CI [−3.20, −0.18], p=0.028) exhibited significant improvements for active treatment compared to sham in the ITT population. Analgesics use was stable and comparable in both groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated modest treatment effects of reduced disease impact, pain and functional impairment from wearable TENS in individuals with fibromyalgia. Subjects with higher pain sensitivity exhibited larger treatment effects than those with lower pain sensitivity. Wearable TENS may be a safe treatment option for people with fibromyalgia.

Clinicaltrials.gov Registration

NCT03714425.

Demographic Characteristics and Clinical Features of Fibromyalgia in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

The aim of this study is to characterize the demographics, fibromyalgia-related symptom severity and quality of life (QOL) among Chinese fibromyalgia patients.

Methods

A total of 124 patients who met the ACR 1990 criteria were recruited. Each subject completed a packet of questionnaires for collecting data on the demographics, medical history and severity of six major symptoms of fibromyalgia (i.e., pain, fatigue, sleep quality, depression, stress and QOL).

Results

The majority of the study subjects were women (86.3%), were married (78.2%) and had a mean age of 49.4 years and a median symptom duration of 24 months. Compared to their female counterparts, male patients were younger, were more likely to be employed, had a higher income and were more likely to be current smokers and alcohol drinkers (all p ≦ 0.027). Most patients experienced moderate to severe pain (69.4%), severe fatigue (70.2%) and moderate to severe depression (53.3%). A small percentage (19.4%) of the patients had very poor quality of sleep, and over one third (37.1%) suffered from moderate to severe stress. Less than one third (27.5%) patients’ health status was moderately or highly impacted by fibromyalgia. The mental health of men was affected significantly more than that of women, with lower SF-36 scores in the SF-36 mental component summary (p = 0.043) and role emotional (p = 0.006).

Conclusion

This study has revealed that Chinese fibromyalgia patients might share similar demographics but milder fibromyalgia-related symptoms and better mental QOL compared to patients of other races and ethnic groups. Some differences between male and female patients were found, too. Further cross-sectional studies with a larger sample size and nationwide study sites are needed to replicate those clinical findings.

An Association of Serotonin with Pain Disorders and Its Modulation by Estrogens

Ovarian hormones play an important role in pain perception, and are responsible, at least in part, for the pain threshold differences between the sexes. Modulation of pain and its perception are mediated by neurochemical changes in several pathways, affecting both the central and peripheral nervous systems. One of the most studied neurotransmitters related to pain disorders is serotonin. Estrogen can modify serotonin synthesis and metabolism, promoting a general increase in its tonic effects. Studies evaluating the relationship between serotonin and disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, migraine, and other types of headache suggest a clear impact of this neurotransmitter, thereby increasing the interest in serotonin as a possible future therapeutic target. This literature review describes the importance of substances such as serotonin and ovarian hormones in pain perception and illustrates the relationship between those two, and their direct influence on the presentation of the aforementioned pain-related conditions. Additionally, we review the pathways and receptors implicated in each disorder. Finally, the objective was to stimulate future pharmacological research to experimentally evaluate the potential of serotonin modulators and ovarian hormones as therapeutic agents to regulate pain in specific subpopulations.

Treatment for Depression and Health-Related Quality of Life among Adults with Arthritis

Depression treatment has been proven to relieve depressive symptoms and pain and may therefore improve the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among adults with arthritis. The objective of the current study was to examine the HRQoL associated with depression treatment among adults with arthritis and depression. A retrospective longitudinal cohort study design using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2009-2012) was adopted. The study sample consisted of adults (≥ 21 years) with co-existing arthritis and depression (N = 1692). Depression treatment was categorized into: antidepressants only, psychotherapy with or without antidepressants, and neither antidepressants nor psychotherapy. Multivariable Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regressions, which controlled for observed selection bias with inverse probability treatment weights (IPTW) were built to examine the association between depression treatment categories and the HRQoL scores. The OLS regression controlled for factors in the biological, psychological and social domains that may affect HRQoL. A majority of individuals reported taking antidepressants only (52%), 24.4% reported receiving psychotherapy with or without antidepressants and 23% did not receive either antidepressants or psychotherapy. In multivariable OLS regression with IPTWs, adults using only antidepressants had marginally higher physical component summary scores (beta = 0.96, p value = 0.096) compared to no depression treatment. There were no significant associations between depression categories and mental component summary scores. HRQoL was not affected by depression treatment in adults with coexisting arthritis and depression. Improvement in HRQoL may require a collaborative care approach and such intense care may not be replicated in real-world practice settings.

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.

Alternatives to Opioids in the Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Randomized, Controlled, and Blinded Clinical Trials

Chronic pain exerts a tremendous burden on individuals and societies. If one views chronic pain as a single disease entity, then it is the most common and costly medical condition. At present, medical professionals who treat patients in chronic pain are recommended to provide comprehensive and multidisciplinary treatments, which may include pharmacotherapy. Many providers use nonopioid medications to treat chronic pain; however, for some patients, opioid analgesics are the exclusive treatment of chronic pain. However, there is currently an epidemic of opioid use in the United States, and recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have recommended that the use of opioids for nonmalignant chronic pain be used only in certain circumstances. The goal of this review was to report the current body of evidence-based medicine gained from prospective, randomized-controlled, blinded studies on the use of nonopioid analgesics for the most common noncancer chronic pain conditions. A total of 9566 studies were obtained during literature searches, and 271 of these met inclusion for this review. Overall, while many nonopioid analgesics have been found to be effective in reducing pain for many chronic pain conditions, it is evident that the number of high-quality studies is lacking, and the effect sizes noted in many studies are not considered to be clinically significant despite statistical significance. More research is needed to determine effective and mechanism-based treatments for the chronic pain syndromes discussed in this review. Utilization of rigorous and homogeneous research methodology would likely allow for better consistency and reproducibility, which is of utmost importance in guiding evidence-based care.

Multidimensional daily diary of fatigue-fibromyalgia-17 items (MDF-fibro-17): part 2 psychometric evaluation in fibromyalgia patients

Background

The Multidimensional Daily Diary of Fatigue-Fibromyalgia-17 instrument (MDF-Fibro-17) has been developed for use in fibromyalgia (FM) clinical studies and includes 5 domains: Global Fatigue Experience, Cognitive Fatigue, Physical Fatigue, Motivation, and Impact on Function. Psychometric properties of the MDF-Fibro-17 needed to demonstrate the appropriateness of using this instrument in clinical studies are presented.

Methods

Psychometric analyses were conducted to evaluate the factor structure, reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the MDF-Fibro-17 using data from a Phase 2 clinical study of FM patients (N = 381). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed to ensure understanding of the multidimensional domain structure, and a secondary factor analysis of the domains examined the appropriateness of calculating a total score in addition to domain scores. Longitudinal psychometric analyses (test-retest reliability and responder analysis) were also conducted on the data from Baseline to Week 6.

Results

The CFA supported the 17-item, 5 domain structure of this instrument as the best fit of the data: comparative fit index (CFI) and non-normed fit index (NNFI) were 0.997 and 0.992 respectively, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) was 0.010 and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.06. In addition, total score (CFI and NNFI both 0.95) met required standards. For the total and 5 domain scores, reliability and validity data were acceptable: test-retest and internal consistency were above 0.9; correlations were as expected with the Global Fatigue Index (GFI) (0.62-0.75), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total (0.59–0.71), and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality (VT) (0.43–0.53); and discrimination was shown using quintile scores for the GFI, FIQ Total, and Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) quartiles. In addition, sensitivity to change was demonstrated with an overall mean responder score of -2.59 using anchor-based methods.

Conclusion

The MDF-Fibro-17 reliably measures 5 domains of FM-related fatigue and psychometric evaluation confirms that this measure meets or exceeds each of the predefined acceptable thresholds for evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to changes in clinical status. This suggests that the MDF-Fibro-17 is an appropriate and responsive measure of FM-related fatigue in clinical studies.

Update on Treatment Guideline in Fibromyalgia Syndrome with Focus on Pharmacology

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a chronic condition with unknown aetiology. The pathophysiology of the disease is incompletely understood; despite advances in our knowledge with regards to abnormal central and peripheral pain processing, and hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal dysfunction, there is no clear specific pathophysiological therapeutic target. The management of this complex condition has thus perplexed the medical community for many years, and several national and international guidelines have aimed to address this complexity. The most recent guidelines from European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2016), Canadian Pain Society (2012), and The Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) (2012) highlight the change in attitudes regarding the overall approach to FMS, but offer varying advice with regards to the use of pharmacological agents. Amitriptyline, Pregabalin and Duloxetine are used most commonly in FMS and though modestly effective, are useful adjunctive treatment to non-pharmaceutical measures.

Clinical Experience With Desvenlafaxine in Treatment of Patients With Fibromyalgia Syndrome

Two multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive-design trials of desvenlafaxine for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) were conducted. In study 1, male and female patients were randomized to a 27-week treatment with placebo or desvenlafaxine 50, 100, 200, or 400 mg/d. In study 2, female patients were randomized to an 8-week treatment with placebo, desvenlafaxine 200 mg/d, or pregabalin 450 mg/d after a placebo run-in. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score. Protocol-specified interim analyses were planned after 12 (study 1) and 8 (study 2) weeks of treatment. Safety data were collected. In all, 697 patients were randomly assigned to treatment in study 1. At the interim analysis (n = 346), none of the desvenlafaxine doses met the efficacy criteria (mean [SE] advantage over placebo, -0.21 [0.36] to 0.04 [0.35]), and the study was terminated. Study 2 was stopped for business reasons before the planned interim analysis. NRS scores in week 8 were -1.98 (0.37), -1.60 (0.37), and -1.70 (0.38) for placebo (n = 26), desvenlafaxine 250 mg/d (n = 24), and pregabalin 450 mg/d (n = 21), respectively; neither active treatment differed significantly from placebo. Desvenlafaxine was generally safe and well tolerated. Efficacy of desvenlafaxine for pain associated with FMS was not demonstrated.

Is the Efficacy of Milnacipran in Fibromyalgia Predictable? A Data-Mining Analysis of Baseline and Outcome Variables

OBJECTIVES

Minalcipran has been approved for the treatment of fibromyalgia in several countries including Australia. Australian agency considered that the overall efficacy is moderate, although clinically significant, and could be translated into a real and strong improvement in some patients. The determination of the characteristics of patients who could benefit the most from milnacipran (MLN) is the primary objective of this manuscript.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the 3 pivotal phase 3 clinical trials of the Australian submission dossier were assembled into a database. A clustering method was implemented to exhibit natural groupings of homogeneous observations into clusters of efficacy outcomes and individual patients. Next, baseline characteristics were investigated using a data-mining method to determine the clinical features that may be predictive of a substantially improved effect of MLN on a set of efficacy outcomes.

RESULTS

The clustering analysis reveals 3 symptom domains: "Pain and global," "Mood and central status," and "Function." We show that improvement in "Fatigue" goes with improvement in "Function." Furthermore, the predictive data-mining analysis exhibits 4 single baseline characteristics that are associated with a substantially improved effect of MLN on efficacy outcomes. These are high pain intensity, low anxiety or catastrophizing level, absence of major sleeping problems, and physical limitations in the daily life effort.

DISCUSSION

Clustering and predictive data-mining methods provide additional insight about fibromyalgia, its symptoms, and treatment. The information is useful to physicians to optimize prescriptions in the daily practice and to regulatory bodies to refine indications.

Treatment Patterns Associated with ACR-Recommended Medications in the Management of Fibromyalgia in the United States

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia (FM) affects up to 6% of U.S. adults, resulting in a significant burden on the health care system and poor quality of life for patients. Duloxetine, pregabalin, and milnacipran are approved for management of FM; however, consensus is lacking regarding optimal therapy. Patients with FM taking approved medications often do not experience meaningful symptom relief, and many experience intolerable adverse events.

OBJECTIVE

To assess treatment patterns associated with available and commonly used medications for the management of FM using U.S. health insurance claims.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis used the MarketScan claims database to identify adults with a first diagnosis of FM (ICD-9-CM code 729.1) between 2009 and 2011 with continuous health plan enrollment for 12 months pre- and post-index. Medications of interest were pregabalin, gabapentin, duloxetine, milnacipran, cyclobenzaprine, and tramadol. These are 6 of the 8 medications recommended by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) for treating FM; the other 2 (amitriptyline and venlafaxine) were only included in some initial assessments. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used to assess overall comorbidity burden. Endpoints included proportion of patients treated within 1 year after first diagnosis; initial treatment pattern; adherence over the first-year follow-up period for the medications of interest; and discontinuation, switching, and combination therapy patterns among pain medications of interest at different time points. Proportion of days covered (PDC; defined as number of days in the period when the patient had drug supply divided by the number of days in the period) was used to define adherence, which was categorized as low (PDC < 50%), medium (PDC 50% to < 80%), or high (PDC ≥ 80%). The time to discontinuation (defined as the first drug supply gap ≥ 90 days) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 240,144 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were predominantly women (68%), had preferred provider organization insurance coverage (68%), and had a CCI score < 1 at baseline (69%). Only 31% (n = 74,738) initiated a treatment with a prescription medication listed in the ACR guidelines, and many patients received less than the recommended dose. Most (n = 70,919) patients initially received monotherapy with one of the 8 prescription medications. Of those who started with ≥ 2 medications (n = 3,819), cyclobenzaprine plus tramadol was the most frequent combination. Adherence was suboptimal for all 6 medications of interest. Duloxetine had the highest mean PDC (59%); for all other agents, mean PDC was < 50%. With the exception of duloxetine, discontinuation rates at 6 months were > 50% for all agents. Alterations in therapy were common. Among patients who discontinued their initial treatment of duloxetine, pregabalin, or milnacipran, approximately one-third had switched treatments within 90 days after their first prescription. For those who maintained their initial treatment agent, approximately 50% of patients added a second pain medication within 1 year of treatment initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that patients with FM often do not receive 1 of the prescription medications recommended by ACR guidelines, and those who do are commonly prescribed lower-than-recommended doses, potentially resulting in poor effectiveness and tolerability. Discontinuation, switching, and addition of new pain medications are common, which may indicate low levels of satisfaction with initial treatment. New therapies with improved effectiveness and better tolerability are urgently needed for patients with FM.

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.

Neurocognitive complaints and functional status among patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to conduct a longitudinal examination of cognitive complaints and functional status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) alone and those who also had fibromyalgia (CFS/FM).

METHODS

A total of 93 patients from a tertiary care fatigue clinic were evaluated on four occasions, each 6 months apart. Each evaluation included a tender point assessment, and self-reported functional status and cognitive complaints.

RESULTS

Patients with CFS/FM reported significantly worse physical functioning, more bodily pain, and more cognitive difficulties (visuo-perceptual ability and verbal memory) than patients with CFS alone. Over time, bodily pain decreased only for participants with CFS alone. Verbal memory problems were associated with more bodily pain for both patient groups, whereas visuo-perceptual problems were associated with worse functional status for patients with CFS alone.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the literature on functional status, longitudinal course, and cognitive difficulties among patients with CFS and those with CFS and FM. The results suggest that patients with CFS/FM are more disabled, have more cognitive complaints, and improve more slowly over time than patients with CFS alone. Specific cognitive difficulties are related to worse functional status, which supports the addition of cognitive difficulties to the FM case criteria.

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.

A Systematic Overview of Reviews for Complementary and Alternative Therapies in the Treatment of the Fibromyalgia Syndrome

Objectives. This systematic overview of reviews aimed to summarize evidence and methodological quality from systematic reviews of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for the fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Methods. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were screened from their inception to Sept 2013 to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of CAM interventions for FMS. Methodological quality of reviews was rated using the AMSTAR instrument. Results. Altogether 25 systematic reviews were found; they investigated the evidence of CAM in general, exercised-based CAM therapies, manipulative therapies, Mind/Body therapies, acupuncture, hydrotherapy, phytotherapy, and homeopathy. Methodological quality of reviews ranged from lowest to highest possible quality. Consistently positive results were found for tai chi, yoga, meditation and mindfulness-based interventions, hypnosis or guided imagery, electromyogram (EMG) biofeedback, and balneotherapy/hydrotherapy. Inconsistent results concerned qigong, acupuncture, chiropractic interventions, electroencephalogram (EEG) biofeedback, and nutritional supplements. Inconclusive results were found for homeopathy and phytotherapy. Major methodological flaws included missing details on data extraction process, included or excluded studies, study details, and adaption of conclusions based on quality assessment. Conclusions. Despite a growing body of scientific evidence of CAM therapies for the management of FMS systematic reviews still show methodological flaws limiting definite conclusions about their efficacy and safety.

Effects of milnacipran on clinical pain and hyperalgesia of patients with fibromyalgia: results of a 6-week randomized controlled trial

Milnacipran is a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as effective therapy for fibromyalgia (FM) symptoms. However, its analgesic mechanism of action is not well understood. We hypothesized that improvement of mechanical and heat hyperalgesia would be a critical component of overall milnacipran efficacy in FM. We used a novel quantitative sensory testing protocol for assessment of mechanical and heat pain sensitivity that can be used for testing of peripheral and central pain mechanisms and their impact on clinical pain over time. We applied tonic mechanical and heat pain stimuli to 46 patients with FM during a randomized controlled trial with either 50 mg milnacipran (n = 23) or placebo (n = 23) twice daily over 6 weeks. During this trial, mean clinical pain (standard deviation) was evaluated daily, and mechanical and heat pain sensitivity every 2 weeks. At study entry, clinical pain was 5.0 (1.8) and 5.5 (1.8) visual analog scale units for patients with FM randomized to placebo and milnacipran, respectively (P > .05). Over 6 weeks, clinical pain of patients with FM significantly declined by 15%, but this improvement was not statistically different between milnacipran and placebo. However, repeated measures of mechanical and heat pain sensitivity reliably predicted up to 80% of the variance in clinical FM pain at every time point. Clinical pain and mechanical/heat pain sensitivity of patients with FM steadily declined during this trial, but the effects of milnacipran were not found to be superior to placebo. Repeated measures of mechanical/heat hyperalgesia reliably predicted large amounts of the variance in clinical pain across all participants, indicating their relevance for FM pain.

PERSPECTIVE

Although clinical pain and hyperalgesia decreased during this 6-week trial, the efficacy of milnacipran was not superior to placebo. The high correlations between clinical pain and hyperalgesia ratings at every time point seem to emphasize the relevant contributions of mechanical and heat hyperalgesia to clinical FM pain.

More ubiquitous effects from non-pharmacologic than from pharmacologic treatments for fibromyalgia syndrome: a meta-analysis examining six core symptoms

This study aimed to characterize and compare the efficacy profile on six fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) core symptoms associated with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments. We screened PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for FM articles from 1990 to September 2012 to analyse randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic treatments to placebo or sham. Papers including assessments of at least 2 of the 6 main FM symptom domains - pain, sleep disturbance, fatigue, affective symptoms (depression/anxiety), functional deficit and cognitive impairment - were selected for analysis. Studies exploring pharmacologic approaches (n = 21) were mainly dedicated to treating a small number of dimensions, mostly pain. They were of good quality but were not prospectively designed to simultaneously document efficacy for the management of multiple core FM symptom domains. Only amitriptyline demonstrated a significant effect on as many as three core FM symptoms, but it exhibited many adverse effects and was subject to early tachyphylaxis. Studies involving non-pharmacologic approaches (n = 64) were typically of poorer quality but were more often dedicated to multidimensional targets. Pool therapy demonstrated significant effects on five symptom domains, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on four domains, balneotherapy on three domains and exercise, cognitive behaviour therapy and massage on two domains each. Differences between pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches may be related to different modes of action, tolerability profiles and study designs. Very few drugs in well-designed clinical trials have demonstrated significant relief for multiple FM symptom domains, whereas non-pharmacologic treatments with weaker study designs have demonstrated multidimensional effects. Future therapeutic trials for FM should prospectively examine each of the core domains and should attempt to combine pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies in well-designed clinical trials.

Beyond pain in fibromyalgia: insights into the symptom of fatigue

Fatigue is a disabling, multifaceted symptom that is highly prevalent and stubbornly persistent. Although fatigue is a frequent complaint among patients with fibromyalgia, it has not received the same attention as pain. Reasons for this include lack of standardized nomenclature to communicate about fatigue, lack of evidence-based guidelines for fatigue assessment, and a deficiency in effective treatment strategies. Fatigue does not occur in isolation; rather, it is present concurrently in varying severity with other fibromyalgia symptoms such as chronic widespread pain, unrefreshing sleep, anxiety, depression, cognitive difficulties, and so on. Survey-based and preliminary mechanistic studies indicate that multiple symptoms feed into fatigue and it may be associated with a variety of physiological mechanisms. Therefore, fatigue assessment in clinical and research settings must consider this multi-dimensionality. While no clinical trial to date has specifically targeted fatigue, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses indicate that treatment modalities studied in the context of other fibromyalgia symptoms could also improve fatigue. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Fibromyalgia Working Group and the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) have been instrumental in propelling the study of fatigue in fibromyalgia to the forefront. The ongoing efforts by PROMIS to develop a brief fibromyalgia-specific fatigue measure for use in clinical and research settings will help define fatigue, allow for better assessment, and advance our understanding of fatigue.

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).

A systematic review and meta-analysis of mindfulness-based stress reduction for the fibromyalgia syndrome

OBJECTIVES

This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for FMS.

METHODS

The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsychINFO and CAMBASE databases were screened in September 2013 to identify randomized and non-randomized controlled trials comparing MBSR to control interventions. Major outcome measures were quality of life and pain; secondary outcomes included sleep quality, fatigue, depression and safety. Standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

Six trials were located with a total of 674 FMS patients. Analyses revealed low quality evidence for short-term improvement of quality of life (SMD=-0.35; 95% CI -0.57 to -0.12; P=0.002) and pain (SMD=-0.23; 95% CI -0.46 to -0.01; P=0.04) after MBSR, when compared to usual care; and for short-term improvement of quality of life (SMD=-0.32; 95% CI -0.59 to -0.04; P=0.02) and pain (SMD=-0.44; 95% CI -0.73 to -0.16; P=0.002) after MBSR, when compared to active control interventions. Effects were not robust against bias. No evidence was further found for secondary outcomes or long-term effects of MBSR. Safety data were not reported in any trial.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found that MBSR might be a useful approach for FMS patients. According to the quality of evidence only a weak recommendation for MBSR can be made at this point. Further high quality RCTs are required for a conclusive judgment of its effects.

A prospective, open-label study of milnacipran in the prevention of headache in patients with episodic or chronic migraine

Migraine is a highly prevalent episodic and chronic neurological disorder that impacts otherwise healthy men and women in their most productive years. An anecdotal survey in our clinical practices suggested that milnacipran, a drug indicated for the treatment of fibromyalgia, reduced the incidence of headache in patients with migraine. In this 3-month, open-label, pilot study, 38 patients diagnosed with episodic migraine and 7 patients with chronic migraine maintained headache diaries to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of milnacipran in headache prevention. After a 1-month period to obtain baseline data, milnacipran treatment was initiated and doses were titrated up to 100 mg/day over 1 month. Maintenance therapy continued for an additional 3 months. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in the number of all headache days during the last 28 days of maintenance therapy analyzed, using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Change from baseline in migraine days during the last month of the maintenance period using LOCF was a secondary end point. Milnacipran 100 mg daily was associated with a significant reduction in headache (-4.2 days; P < 0.001) and migraine frequency (-2.2 days; P < 0.003). The adverse event profile was consistent with prior reports of milnacipran for the treatment of other conditions. However, compared with the recommended protocol, a more gradual increase in milnacipran dose was required to improve tolerability for some patients. The robust efficacy signal found in this study strongly suggests that a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of milnacipran in migraine and chronic headache is warranted.

Interpreting effect sizes and clinical relevance of pharmacological interventions for fibromyalgia

Duloxetine, milnacipran, and pregabalin are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the management of fibromyalgia. A number of meta-analyses, pooled analyses, and systematic reviews have been published in recent years involving the efficacy of these three medications for pain in fibromyalgia. Despite being based on the same clinical data, some analyses found these treatments to have a clinically relevant effect on pain, while others concluded that the advantages were small or of questionable clinical relevance. This commentary discussed possible reasons behind these differing conclusions and explored ways of evaluating the clinical relevance of pharmacological treatments for fibromyalgia. In particular, we considered: (1) the importance of judicious and careful interpretation of average treatment effect size and the recognition that average treatment effect sizes do not always tell the whole story; (2) the utility of individual patient response data to assess clinical relevance; and (3) the importance of considering pain reduction within the context of other benefits due to the presence of associated symptoms in patients with fibromyalgia.

Depression treatment patterns among individuals with osteoarthritis: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Arthritis and depression often co-occur; however, studies that describe patterns of depression treatment among individuals with arthritis are scant. The purpose of the study was to examine depression treatment patterns among individuals with osteoarthritis (OA) by predisposing, enabling, need factors, personal health practices and external health environment.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional design was used. Data were obtained from 2008 and 2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). The sample consisted of 647adults aged over 21 years with depression and OA. Depression treatment was categorized as: 1) No treatment;2) antidepressant use only and 3) both antidepressants and psychotherapy (combination therapy). Chi- square tests and multinomial logistic regressions were used to describe patterns of depression treatment. All analysis was performed using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) version 9.3.

RESULTS

Overall, 13.0% of the study sample reported no depression treatment, 67.8% used antidepressants only and 19.2% used combination therapy. Among individuals with OA significant subgroup differences in depression treatment were observed. For example, African Americans were less likely to report depression treatment compared to whites [antidepressants: AOR=0.33, 95% CI=0.21,0.51; combination therapy: AOR=0.39, 95% CI=0.23, 0.65]. Elderly adults were more likely to receive antidepressants and less likely to receive psychotherapy as compared to younger adults [AOR=0.53, 95% CI= 0.28,0.98]. Adults with anxiety were more likely to report depression treatment compared to those without anxiety [antidepressants: AOR=1.53, 95% CI=1.06, 2.22; combination therapy: AOR=3.52, 95% CI=2.40, 5.15].

CONCLUSION

Future research needs to examine the reason for low rates of combination therapy as well as subgroup differences in combination therapy among individuals with OA.

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.

[Psychopharmacological treatment in patients with somatoform disorders and functional body syndromes]

Somatoform disorders and functional body syndromes define a major, diagnostically heterogeneous group of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms. Psychopharmacological approaches can be derived from the conceptualization of somatoform symptoms and syndromes within a biopsychosocial model. The survey presented focuses on randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies. Antidepressants show a statistically and clinically relevant impact on many somatoform symptoms. In special reference to pain symptoms serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants seem to mediate a more favorable effect than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. For some functional body syndromes, e.g. irritable bowel syndrome and fibromyalgia, a major analgesic effect of antidepressants can be underlined as well. The empirical data for fibromyalgia, however, seem to be more convincing than for irritable bowel syndrome. Pregabalin holds an empirically well established position in the treatment of fibromyalgia. As yet there is no convincing psychopharmacological strategy for chronic fatigue syndrome. Probably due to the inherent relationships to anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and depressive disorders, both hypochondria and body dysmorphic disorder can be positively treated by serotonergic antidepressants as well.

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.

[Drug therapy of fibromyalgia syndrome. Systematic review, meta-analysis and guideline]

BACKGROUND

The scheduled update to the German S3 guidelines on fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies ("Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften", AWMF; registration number 041/004) was planned starting in March 2011.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The development of the guidelines was coordinated by the German Interdisciplinary Association for Pain Therapy ("Deutsche Interdisziplinären Vereinigung für Schmerztherapie", DIVS), 9 scientific medical societies and 2 patient self-help organizations. Eight working groups with a total of 50 members were evenly balanced in terms of gender, medical field, potential conflicts of interest and hierarchical position in the medical and scientific fields. Literature searches were performed using the Medline, PsycInfo, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases (until December 2010). The grading of the strength of the evidence followed the scheme of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The recommendations were based on level of evidence, efficacy (meta-analysis of the outcomes pain, sleep, fatigue and health-related quality of life), acceptability (total dropout rate), risks (adverse events) and applicability of treatment modalities in the German health care system. The formulation and grading of recommendations was accomplished using a multi-step, formal consensus process. The guidelines were reviewed by the boards of the participating scientific medical societies.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Amitriptyline and-in case of comorbid depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder-duloxetine are recommended. Off-label use of duloxetine and pregabalin can be considered in case of no comorbid mental disorder. Strong opioids are not recommended. The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under "Supplemental").

Safety and efficacy of esreboxetine in patients with fibromyalgia: a fourteen-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of multiple fixed dosages of esreboxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia.

METHODS

Patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized to receive esreboxetine at dosages of 4 mg/day (n=277), 8 mg/day (n=284), or 10 mg/day (n=283) or matching placebo (n=278) for 14 weeks. The primary efficacy outcomes were the weekly mean pain score and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score at week 14. Secondary efficacy measures included scores for the Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale, the Global Fatigue Index (GFI), and the 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36; physical function scale only) at week 14. The safety profile of esreboxetine was evaluated based on adverse events and other safety measures.

RESULTS

Patients receiving all dosages of esreboxetine demonstrated statistically significant improvements in the pain score (P≤0.025), the FIQ score (P≤0.023), and the PGIC score (P≤0.007) compared with patients in the placebo group. Additionally, patients receiving esreboxetine at dosages of 4 mg/day and 8 mg/day showed statistically significant improvements in the GFI score compared with those receiving placebo (P=0.001). No significant differences in SF-36 physical function scores were observed between patients receiving esreboxetine (any dosage) and those receiving placebo. Adverse events were mostly mild to moderate in severity; insomnia, constipation, dry mouth, nausea, dizziness, hot flush, headache, hyperhidrosis, and palpitations were reported most frequently.

CONCLUSION

Esreboxetine was generally well tolerated and was associated with significant improvements in pain, FIQ, PGIC, and fatigue scores compared with placebo. The lack of a dose-response relationship in both the efficacy and safety analyses suggests that esreboxetine at a dosage of 4 mg/day would offer clinical benefit with the least risk of drug exposure.

Short-term (2-week) effects of discontinuing milnacipran in patients with fibromyalgia

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of abruptly withdrawing milnacipran during the 2-week discontinuation phase of a study in which FM patients had received 12 weeks of stable-dose treatment with milnacipran at 100 mg/day.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The effects of withdrawing milnacipran were evaluated prospectively over a 2-week period (Weeks 12 to 14) using a randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal design. Patients who had originally received milnacipran 100 mg/d for 12 weeks were re-randomized to continue milnacipran (n = 178) or switch directly to placebo (n = 178); patients originally receiving placebo continued placebo (n = 359).

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicalstrials.gov (NCT00314249).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Loss of efficacy was evaluated by mean changes in pain and functional measures and by percentage of composite responders, defined as patients with simultaneous improvements in pain, global status, and physical functioning. Newly emergent adverse events and changes in vital signs were also recorded.

RESULTS

Within 2 weeks,patients switched from milnacipran to placebo had greater mean worsening in pain, functioning, and global status measures when compared with patients continuing treatment. In addition, significantly fewer composite responders were found in patients who discontinued active treatment than in patients who continued receiving milnacipran (22.0% vs 32.3%, p < 0.05). Incidences of newly emergent adverse events were 16.3% and 18.0% in patients discontinuing and continuing treatment, respectively. Mean vital sign changes decreased or returned to baseline within 2 weeks of discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients discontinuing milnacipran experienced worsening in multiple efficacy parameters within 2 weeks. Vital sign changes observed with milnacipran during the 12-week stable-dose period decreased or returned to baseline values within 2 weeks after discontinuation of treatment. No new safety concerns were found during this discontinuation period with milnacipran.

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.

Ten sessions of adjunctive left prefrontal rTMS significantly reduces fibromyalgia pain: a randomized, controlled pilot study

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the prefrontal cortex can cause changes in acute pain perception. Several weeks of daily left prefrontal TMS has been shown to treat depression. We recruited 20 patients with fibromyalgia, defined by American College of Rheumatology criteria, and randomized them to receive 4000 pulses at 10 Hz TMS (n=10), or sham TMS (n=10) treatment for 10 sessions over 2 weeks along with their standard medications, which were fixed and stable for at least 4 weeks before starting sessions. Subjects recorded daily pain, mood, and activity. Blinded raters assessed pain, mood, functional status, and tender points weekly with the Brief Pain Inventory, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire. No statistically significant differences between groups were observed. Patients who received active TMS had a mean 29% (statistically significant) reduction in pain symptoms in comparison to their baseline pain. Sham TMS participants had a 4% nonsignificant change in daily pain from their baseline pain. At 2 weeks after treatment, there was a significant improvement in depression symptoms in the active group compared to baseline. Pain reduction preceded antidepressant effects. TMS was well tolerated, with few side effects. Further studies that address study limitations are needed to determine whether daily prefrontal TMS may be an effective, durable, and clinically useful treatment for fibromyalgia symptoms.

Intersection of chronic pain treatment and opioid analgesic misuse: causes, treatments, and policy strategies

Treating chronic pain in the context of opioid misuse can be very challenging. This paper explores the epidemiology and potential treatments for chronic pain and opioid misuse and identifies educational and regulation changes that may reduce diversion of opioid analgesics. We cover the epidemiology of chronic pain and aberrant opioid behaviors, psychosocial influences on pain, pharmacological treatments, psychological treatments, and social treatments, as well as educational and regulatory efforts being made to reduce the diversion of prescription opioids. There are a number of ongoing challenges in treating chronic pain and opioid misuse, and more research is needed to provide strong, integrated, and empirically validated treatments to reduce opioid misuse in the context of chronic pain.

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.

Duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia

This article presents a brief review of the physiologic abnormalities seen in fibromyalgia, current theories of widespread pain, and treatment options, including emerging therapeutics, with a focus on the use of duloxetine to manage fibromyalgia symptoms. Major clinical trials that examine the efficacy and effectiveness of duloxetine to date are reviewed, and safety issues are discussed.