Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

New drug treatments, clinical trials, and standards of quality for assessment of evidence justify an update of evidence-based recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), we revised the Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain (NeuPSIG) recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain based on the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Between April, 2013, and January, 2014, NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind studies of oral and topical pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January, 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies. We used number needed to treat (NNT) for 50% pain relief as a primary measure and assessed publication bias; NNT was calculated with the fixed-effects Mantel-Haenszel method.

FINDINGS

229 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of publication bias suggested a 10% overstatement of treatment effects. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater effects than did unpublished studies (r(2) 9·3%, p=0·009). Trial outcomes were generally modest: in particular, combined NNTs were 6·4 (95% CI 5·2-8·4) for serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, mainly including duloxetine (nine of 14 studies); 7·7 (6·5-9·4) for pregabalin; 7·2 (5·9-9·21) for gabapentin, including gabapentin extended release and enacarbil; and 10·6 (7·4-19·0) for capsaicin high-concentration patches. NNTs were lower for tricyclic antidepressants, strong opioids, tramadol, and botulinum toxin A, and undetermined for lidocaine patches. Based on GRADE, final quality of evidence was moderate or high for all treatments apart from lidocaine patches; tolerability and safety, and values and preferences were higher for topical drugs; and cost was lower for tricyclic antidepressants and tramadol. These findings permitted a strong recommendation for use and proposal as first-line treatment in neuropathic pain for tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and gabapentin; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as second line for lidocaine patches, capsaicin high-concentration patches, and tramadol; and a weak recommendation for use and proposal as third line for strong opioids and botulinum toxin A. Topical agents and botulinum toxin A are recommended for peripheral neuropathic pain only.

INTERPRETATION

Our results support a revision of the NeuPSIG recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain. Inadequate response to drug treatments constitutes a substantial unmet need in patients with neuropathic pain. Modest efficacy, large placebo responses, heterogeneous diagnostic criteria, and poor phenotypic profiling probably account for moderate trial outcomes and should be taken into account in future studies.

FUNDING

NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain.

Neuropathic Pain: Central vs. Peripheral Mechanisms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our goal is to examine the processes-both central and peripheral-that underlie the development of peripherally-induced neuropathic pain (pNP) and to highlight recent evidence for mechanisms contributing to its maintenance. While many pNP conditions are initiated by damage to the peripheral nervous system (PNS), their persistence appears to rely on maladaptive processes within the central nervous system (CNS). The potential existence of an autonomous pain-generating mechanism in the CNS creates significant implications for the development of new neuropathic pain treatments; thus, work towards its resolution is crucial. Here, we seek to identify evidence for PNS and CNS independently generating neuropathic pain signals.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent preclinical studies in pNP support and provide key details concerning the role of multiple mechanisms leading to fiber hyperexcitability and sustained electrical discharge to the CNS. In studies regarding central mechanisms, new preclinical evidence includes the mapping of novel inhibitory circuitry and identification of the molecular basis of microglia-neuron crosstalk. Recent clinical evidence demonstrates the essential role of peripheral mechanisms, mostly via studies that block the initially damaged peripheral circuitry. Clinical central mechanism studies use imaging to identify potentially self-sustaining infra-slow CNS oscillatory activity that may be unique to pNP patients. While new preclinical evidence supports and expands upon the key role of central mechanisms in neuropathic pain, clinical evidence for an autonomous central mechanism remains relatively limited. Recent findings from both preclinical and clinical studies recapitulate the critical contribution of peripheral input to maintenance of neuropathic pain. Further clinical investigations on the possibility of standalone central contributions to pNP may be assisted by a reconsideration of the agreed terms or criteria for diagnosing the presence of central sensitization in humans.

Cannabinoids, the endocannabinoid system, and pain: a review of preclinical studies

ABSTRACT

This narrative review represents an output from the International Association for the Study of Pain's global task force on the use of cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis-based medicines for pain management, informed by our companion systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies in this area. Our aims in this review are (1) to describe the value of studying cannabinoids and endogenous cannabinoid (endocannabinoid) system modulators in preclinical/animal models of pain; (2) to discuss both pain-related efficacy and additional pain-relevant effects (adverse and beneficial) of cannabinoids and endocannabinoid system modulators as they pertain to animal models of pathological or injury-related persistent pain; and (3) to identify important directions for future research. In service of these goals, this review (1) provides an overview of the endocannabinoid system and the pharmacology of cannabinoids and endocannabinoid system modulators, with specific relevance to animal models of pathological or injury-related persistent pain; (2) describes pharmacokinetics of cannabinoids in rodents and humans; and (3) highlights differences and discrepancies between preclinical and clinical studies in this area. Preclinical (rodent) models have advanced our understanding of the underlying sites and mechanisms of action of cannabinoids and the endocannabinoid system in suppressing nociceptive signaling and behaviors. We conclude that substantial evidence from animal models supports the contention that cannabinoids and endocannabinoid system modulators hold considerable promise for analgesic drug development, although the challenge of translating this knowledge into clinically useful medicines is not to be underestimated.

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine for pain management: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

ABSTRACT

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) are increasingly used to manage pain, with limited understanding of their efficacy and safety. We summarised efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of these types of drugs for treating pain using randomised controlled trials: in people of any age, with any type of pain, and for any treatment duration. Primary outcomes were 30% and 50% reduction in pain intensity, and AEs. We assessed risk of bias of included studies, and the overall quality of evidence using GRADE. Studies of <7 and >7 days treatment duration were analysed separately. We included 36 studies (7217 participants) delivering cannabinoids (8 studies), cannabis (6 studies), and CBM (22 studies); all had high and/or uncertain risk of bias. Evidence of benefit was found for cannabis <7 days (risk difference 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.20-0.46; 2 trials, 231 patients, very low-quality evidence) and nabiximols >7 days (risk difference 0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.12; 6 trials, 1484 patients, very low-quality evidence). No other beneficial effects were found for other types of cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in our primary analyses; 81% of subgroup analyses were negative. Cannabis, nabiximols, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol had more AEs than control. Studies in this field have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had GRADE rating of low- or very low-quality evidence. We have little confidence in the estimates of effect. The evidence neither supports nor refutes claims of efficacy and safety for cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in the management of pain.

Trial designs for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy prevention: ACTTION recommendations

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and potentially dose-limiting side effect of neurotoxic chemotherapies. No therapies are available to prevent CIPN. The small number of positive randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating preventive therapies for CIPN provide little guidance to inform the design of future trials. Moreover, the lack of consensus regarding major design features in this area poses challenges to development of new therapies. An Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION)-Consortium on Clinical Endpoints and Procedures for Peripheral Neuropathy Trials (CONCEPPT) meeting attended by neurologists, oncologists, pharmacists, clinical trialists, statisticians, and regulatory experts was convened to discuss design considerations and provide recommendations for CIPN prevention trials. This article outlines considerations related to design of RCTs that evaluate preventive therapies for CIPN including (1) selection of eligibility criteria (e.g., cancer types, chemotherapy types, inclusion of preexisting neuropathy); (2) selection of outcome measures and endpoints, including those that incorporate alterations in chemotherapy dosing, which may affect the rate of CIPN development and its severity; (3) potential effects of the investigational therapy on the efficacy of chemotherapy; and (4) sample size estimation. Our hope is that attention to the design considerations and recommendations outlined in this article will improve the quality and assay sensitivity of CIPN prevention trials and thereby accelerate the identification of efficacious therapies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids, cannabis-based medicines, and endocannabinoid system modulators tested for antinociceptive effects in animal models of injury-related or pathological persistent pain

ABSTRACT

We report a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that assessed the antinociceptive efficacy of cannabinoids, cannabis-based medicines, and endocannabinoid system modulators on pain-associated behavioural outcomes in animal models of pathological or injury-related persistent pain. In April 2019, we systematically searched 3 online databases and used crowd science and machine learning to identify studies for inclusion. We calculated a standardised mean difference effect size for each comparison and performed a random-effects meta-analysis. We assessed the impact of study design characteristics and reporting of mitigations to reduce the risk of bias. We meta-analysed 374 studies in which 171 interventions were assessed for antinociceptive efficacy in rodent models of pathological or injury-related pain. Most experiments were conducted in male animals (86%). Antinociceptive efficacy was most frequently measured by attenuation of hypersensitivity to evoked limb withdrawal. Selective cannabinoid type 1, cannabinoid type 2, nonselective cannabinoid receptor agonists (including delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-alpha agonists (predominantly palmitoylethanolamide) significantly attenuated pain-associated behaviours in a broad range of inflammatory and neuropathic pain models. Fatty acid amide hydrolase inhibitors, monoacylglycerol lipase inhibitors, and cannabidiol significantly attenuated pain-associated behaviours in neuropathic pain models but yielded mixed results in inflammatory pain models. The reporting of criteria to reduce the risk of bias was low; therefore, the studies have an unclear risk of bias. The value of future studies could be enhanced by improving the reporting of methodological criteria, the clinical relevance of the models, and behavioural assessments. Notwithstanding, the evidence supports the hypothesis of cannabinoid-induced analgesia.

Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In these guidelines, we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies providing information on the sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing, neurophysiology, skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy. We also analysed how functional neuroimaging, peripheral nerve blocks, and genetic testing might provide useful information in diagnosing NeP.

RESULTS

Of the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I-DN4 (self-administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, and S-LANSS (self-administered LANSS) and PainDETECT weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic pathway for patients with possible NeP. We devised a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials in the NeP diagnosis. Trigeminal reflex testing received a strong recommendation in diagnosing secondary trigeminal neuralgia. Although many studies support the usefulness of corneal confocal microscopy in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy, no study specifically investigated the diagnostic accuracy of this technique in patients with NeP. Functional neuroimaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in disclosing pathophysiology and/or predicting outcomes, but current literature does not support their use for diagnosing NeP. Genetic testing may be considered at specialist centres, in selected cases.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for NeP diagnosis. Due to the poor-to-moderate quality of evidence identified by this review, future large-scale, well-designed, multicentre studies assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests for NeP are needed.

Idiopathic distal sensory polyneuropathy: ACTTION diagnostic criteria

OBJECTIVE

To present standardized diagnostic criteria for idiopathic distal sensory polyneuropathy (iDSP) and its subtypes: idiopathic mixed fiber sensory neuropathy (iMFN), idiopathic small fiber sensory neuropathy (iSFN), and idiopathic large fiber sensory neuropathy (iLFN) for use in research.

METHODS

The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the Food and Drug Administration convened a meeting to develop consensus diagnostic criteria for iMFN, iSFN, and iLFN. After background presentations, a collaborative, iterative approach was used to develop expert consensus for new criteria.

RESULTS

An iDSP diagnosis requires at least 1 small fiber (SF) or large fiber (LF) symptom, at least 1 SF or LF sign, abnormalities in sensory nerve conduction studies (NCS) or distal intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD), and exclusion of known etiologies. An iMFN diagnosis requires that at least 1 of the above clinical features is SF and 1 clinical feature is LF with abnormalities in sensory NCS or IENFD. Diagnostic criteria for iSFN require at least 1 SF symptom and at least 1 SF sign with abnormal IENFD, normal sensory NCS, and the absence of LF symptoms and signs. Diagnostic criteria for iLFN require at least 1 LF symptom and at least 1 LF sign with normal IENFD, abnormal sensory NCS, and absence of SF symptoms and signs.

CONCLUSION

Adoption of these standardized diagnostic criteria will advance research and clinical trials and spur development of novel therapies for iDSPs.

Single dose intravenous paracetamol or intravenous propacetamol for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 10, 2011. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the most commonly prescribed analgesic for the treatment of acute pain. It may be administered orally, rectally, or intravenously. The efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) formulations of paracetamol, IV paracetamol, and IV propacetamol (a prodrug that is metabolized to paracetamol), compared with placebo and other analgesics, is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of IV formulations of paracetamol for the treatment of postoperative pain in both adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the search for the previous review in May 2010. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), EMBASE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), LILACS (2010 to 2016), a clinical trials registry, and reference lists of reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language and we retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled single dose clinical trials of IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol for acute postoperative pain in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies (36 from the original review and 39 from our updated review) enrolling a total of 7200 participants.Among primary outcomes, 36% of participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol experienced at least 50% pain relief over four hours compared with 16% of those receiving placebo (number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) = 5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 5.6, high quality evidence). The proportion of participants in IV paracetamol/propacetamol groups experiencing at least 50% pain relief diminished over six hours, as reflected in a higher NNT of 6 (4.6 to 7.1, moderate quality evidence). Mean pain intensity at four hours was similar when comparing IV paracetamol and placebo, but was seven points lower on a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain imaginable, 95% CI -9 to -6, low quality evidence) in those receiving paracetamol at six hours.For secondary outcomes, participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol required 26% less opioid over four hours and 16% less over six hours (moderate quality evidence) than those receiving placebo. However, this did not translate to a clinically meaningful reduction in opioid-induced adverse events.Meta-analysis of efficacy comparisons between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators (e.g., opioids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) were either not statistically significant, not clinically significant, or both.Adverse events occurred at similar rates with IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol and placebo. However, pain on infusion occurred more frequently in those receiving IV propacetamol versus placebo (23% versus 1%). Meta-analysis did not demonstrate clinically meaningful differences between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators for any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we have found 39 new studies providing additional information. Most included studies evaluated adults only. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides high quality evidence that a single dose of either IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol provides around four hours of effective analgesia for about 36% of patients with acute postoperative pain. Low to very low quality evidence demonstrates that both formulations are associated with few adverse events, although patients receiving IV propacetamol have a higher incidence of pain on infusion than both placebo and IV paracetamol.

Prognostic prediction models for chronic postsurgical pain in adults: a systematic review

ABSTRACT

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) affects an estimated 10% to 50% of adults depending on the type of surgical procedure. Clinical prediction models can help clinicians target preventive strategies towards patients at high risk for CPSP. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review was to identify and describe existing prediction models for CPSP in adults. A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in March 2020 for English peer-reviewed studies that used data collected between 2000 and 2020. Studies that developed, validated, or updated a prediction model in adult patients who underwent any surgical procedure were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility; extracted data; and assessed risk of bias using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The search identified 2037 records; 28 articles were reviewed in full text. Fifteen studies reporting on 19 prediction models were included; all were at high risk of bias. Model discrimination, measured by the area under receiver operating curves or c-statistic, ranged from 0.690 to 0.816. The most common predictors identified in final prediction models included preoperative pain in the surgical area, preoperative pain in other areas, age, sex or gender, and acute postsurgical pain. Clinical prediction models may support prevention and management of CPSP, but existing models are at high risk of bias that affects their reliability to inform practice and generalizability to wider populations. Adherence to standardized guidelines for clinical prediction model development is necessary to derive a prediction model of value to clinicians.

Perioperative Pain and Addiction Interdisciplinary Network (PAIN): consensus recommendations for perioperative management of cannabis and cannabinoid-based medicine users by a modified Delphi process

In many countries, liberalisation of the legislation regulating the use of cannabis has outpaced rigorous scientific studies, and a growing number of patients presenting for surgery consume cannabis regularly. Research to date suggests that cannabis can impact perioperative outcomes. We present recommendations obtained using a modified Delphi method for the perioperative care of cannabis-using patients. A steering committee was formed and a review of medical literature with respect to perioperative cannabis use was conducted. This was followed by the recruitment of a panel of 17 experts on the care of cannabis-consuming patients. Panellists were blinded to each other's participation and were provided with rater forms exploring the appropriateness of specific perioperative care elements. The completed rater forms were analysed for consensus. The expert panel was then unblinded and met to discuss the rater form analyses. Draft recommendations were then created and returned to the expert panel for further comment. The draft recommendations were also sent to four independent reviewers (a surgeon, a nurse practitioner, and two patients). The collected feedback was used to finalise the recommendations. The major recommendations obtained included emphasising the importance of eliciting a history of cannabis use, quantifying it, and ensuring contact with a cannabis authoriser (if one exists). Recommendations also included the consideration of perioperative cannabis weaning, additional postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, and additional attention to monitoring and maintaining anaesthetic depth. Postoperative recommendations included anticipating increased postoperative analgesic requirements and maintaining vigilance for cannabis withdrawal syndrome.

Risk factors for persistent pain after breast and thoracic surgeries: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) is common after breast and thoracic surgeries. Understanding which risk factors consistently contribute to PPSP will allow clinicians to apply preventive strategies, as they emerge, to high-risk patients. The objective of this work was to systematically review and meta-analyze the literature on risk factors of PPSP after breast and thoracic surgeries. A systematic literature search using Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases was conducted. Study screening with inclusion and exclusion criteria, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment was performed independently by 2 authors. The data for each surgical group were analyzed separately and meta-analyzed where possible. The literature search yielded 5584 articles, and data from 126 breast surgery and 143 thoracic surgery articles were considered for meta-analysis. In breast surgery, younger age, higher body mass index, anxiety, depression, diabetes, smoking, preoperative pain, moderate to severe acute postoperative pain, reoperation, radiotherapy, and axillary lymph node dissection were the main factors associated with higher risk of PPSP. In thoracic surgery, younger age, female sex, hypertension, preoperative pain, moderate to severe acute postoperative pain, surgical approach, major procedure, and wound complications were associated with PPSP. This systematic review demonstrated certain consistent risk factors of PPSP after breast and thoracic surgeries, as well as identified research gaps. Understanding the factors that increase susceptibility to PPSP can help selectively allocate resources to optimize perioperative care in high-risk patients and help develop targeted, risk-stratified interventions for PPSP prevention.

International Association for the Study of Pain Presidential Task Force on Cannabis and Cannabinoid Analgesia: research agenda on the use of cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines for pain management

ABSTRACT

The President of the International Association for the Study of Pain established a task force on cannabis and cannabinoid analgesia to systematically examine the evidence on (1) analgesic pharmacology of cannabinoids and preclinical evidence on their efficacy in animal models of injury-related or pathological persistent pain; (2) the clinical efficacy of cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis-based medicines for pain; (3) harms related to long-term use of cannabinoids; as well as (4) societal issues and policy implications related to the use of these compounds for pain management. Here, we summarize key knowledge gaps identified in the task force outputs and propose a research agenda for generating high-quality evidence on the topic. The systematic assessment of preclinical and clinical literature identified gaps in rigor of study design and reporting across the translational spectrum. We provide recommendations to improve the quality, rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of preclinical and clinical research on cannabis and cannabinoids for pain, as well as for the conduct of systematic reviews on the topic. Gaps related to comprehensive understanding of the endocannabinoid system and cannabinoid pharmacology, including pharmacokinetics and drug formulation aspects, are discussed. We outline key areas where high-quality clinical trials with cannabinoids are needed. Remaining important questions about long-term and short-term safety of cannabis and cannabinoids are emphasized. Finally, regulatory, societal, and policy challenges associated with medicinal and nonmedicinal use of cannabis are highlighted, with recommendations for improving patient safety and reducing societal harms in the context of pain management.

Somatosensory predictors of response to pregabalin in painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study

Painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a debilitating and treatment-resistant sequela of many chemotherapeutic medications. Ligands of α2δ subunits of voltage-gated Ca channels, such as pregabalin, have shown efficacy in reducing mechanical sensitivity in animal models of neuropathic pain. In addition, some data suggest that pregabalin may be more efficacious in relieving neuropathic pain in subjects with increased sensitivity to pinprick. We hypothesized that greater mechanical sensitivity, as quantified by decreased mechanical pain threshold at the feet, would be predictive of a greater reduction in average daily pain in response to pregabalin vs placebo. In a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 26 patients with painful CIPN from oxaliplatin, docetaxel, or paclitaxel received 28-day treatment with pregabalin (titrated to maximum dose 600 mg per day) and placebo in crossover design. Twenty-three participants were eligible for efficacy analysis. Mechanical pain threshold was not significantly correlated with reduction in average pain (P = 0.97) or worst pain (P = 0.60) in response to pregabalin. There was no significant difference between pregabalin and placebo in reducing average daily pain (22.5% vs 10.7%, P = 0.23) or worst pain (29.2% vs 16.0%, P = 0.13) from baseline. Post hoc analysis of patients with CIPN caused by oxaliplatin (n = 18) demonstrated a larger reduction in worst pain with pregabalin than with placebo (35.4% vs 14.6%, P = 0.04). In summary, baseline mechanical pain threshold tested on dorsal feet did not meaningfully predict the analgesic response to pregabalin in painful CIPN.

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines for pain management: an overview of systematic reviews

ABSTRACT

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines (CBM) are increasingly used to manage pain, with limited understanding of their efficacy and safety. We assessed methodological quality, scope, and results of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of these treatments. Several search strategies sought self-declared systematic reviews. Methodological quality was assessed using both AMSTAR-2 and techniques important for bias reduction in pain studies. Of the 106 articles read, 57 were self-declared systematic reviews, most published since 2010. They included any type of cannabinoid, cannabis, or CBM, at any dose, however administered, in a broad range of pain conditions. No review examined the effects of a particular cannabinoid, at a particular dose, using a particular route of administration, for a particular pain condition, reporting a particular analgesic outcome. Confidence in the results in the systematic reviews using AMSTAR-2 definitions was critically low (41), low (8), moderate (6), or high (2). Few used criteria important for bias reduction in pain. Cochrane reviews typically provided higher confidence; all industry-conflicted reviews provided critically low confidence. Meta-analyses typically pooled widely disparate studies, and, where assessable, were subject to potential publication bias. Systematic reviews with positive or negative recommendation for use of cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in pain typically rated critically low or low (24/25 [96%] positive; 10/12 [83%] negative). Current reviews are mostly lacking in quality and cannot provide a basis for decision-making. A new high-quality systematic review of randomised controlled trials is needed to critically assess the clinical evidence for cannabinoids, cannabis, or CBM in pain.

Structural and functional characterization of nerve fibres in polyneuropathy and healthy subjects

OBJECTIVES

Quantification of intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) is an important small fibre measure in distal symmetric polyneuropathies (DSP), but quantitative evaluation of additional structural and functional factors may help in elucidating the underlying mechanisms, and in improving the diagnostic accuracy in DSP. The literature reports a weak or moderate relationship between IENFD and spontaneous and evoked pain in neuropathies, but the relationship between functional and structural small fibre parameters in patients with DSP is unclear. The objectives of the current study, therefore, were to determine morphological and functional parameters related to small nerve fibres in subjects with distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) and healthy controls, and to characterize the interplay among these parameters in these two groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

17 patients with painful DSP (≥4 on 0-10 numerical rating scale) and with symptoms and signs of small fibre abnormality (with or without large fibre involvement) and 19 healthy control subjects underwent comprehensive functional and structural small fibre assessments that included quantitative sensory testing, response to 30min topical application of 10% capsaicin and analysis of skin biopsy samples taken from the distal leg (IENFD, epidermal and dermal nerve fibre length densities (eNFLD, dNFLD) using global spatial sampling and axonal swelling ratios (swellings/IENFD and swellings/NFLD)).

RESULTS

DSP patients had reduced sensitivity to cold (median -11.07°C vs. -2.60, P≤0.001) and heat (median 46.7 vs. 37.70, P≤0.001), diminished neurovascular (median 184 vs. 278 mean flux on laser Doppler, P=0.0003) and pain response to topical capsaicin (median 10 vs. 35 on 0-100 VAS, P=0.0002), and lower IENFD, eNFLD and dNFLD values combined with increased swelling ratios (all P<0.001) compared to healthy controls. The correlation between structural and functional parameters was poor in DSP patients, compared with healthy controls. In healthy controls eNFLD and dNFLD, IENFD and eNFLD, IENFD and dNFLD all correlated well with each other (r=0.81; P≤0.001, r=0.58; P=0.009, r=0.60; P=0.007, respectively). In DSP, on the other hand, only eNFLD and dNFLD showed significant correlation (r=0.53, P=0.03). A diagnostic approach of combined IENFD and eNFLD utilization increased DSP diagnostic sensitivity from 82.0% to 100% and specificity from 84.0% to 89.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a rigorous comparison between functional and morphological parameters, including parameters such as eNFDL and dNFLD that have not been previously evaluated in this context. The correlation pattern between functional and structural small fibre parameters is different in patients with DSP when compared to healthy controls. The findings suggest a more direct relationship between structure and function of nerve fibres in healthy controls compared to DSP. Furthermore, the findings suggest that combining IENFD with measurement of NFLD improves the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of DSP.

IMPLICATIONS

Combining small fibre parameters may improve the diagnostic accuracy of DSP.

General risks of harm with cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine possibly relevant to patients receiving these for pain management: an overview of systematic reviews

ABSTRACT

The growing demand for improved pain treatments together with expanding legalization of, and access to, cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines has intensified the focus on risk-benefit considerations in pain management. Given limited harms data from analgesic clinical trials, we conducted an overview of systematic reviews focused on all harms possibly relevant to patients receiving cannabinoids for pain management. This PROSPERO-registered, PRISMA-compliant systematic overview identified 79 reviews, encompassing over 2200 individual reports about psychiatric and psychosocial harms, cognitive/behavioral effects, motor vehicle accidents, cardiovascular, respiratory, cancer-related, maternal/fetal, and general harms. Reviews, and their included studies, were of variable quality. Available evidence suggests variable associations between cannabis exposure (ranging from monthly to daily use based largely on self-report) and psychosis, motor vehicle accidents, respiratory problems, and other harms. Most evidence comes from settings other than that of pain management (eg, nonmedicinal and experimental) but does signal a need for caution and more robust harms evaluation in future studies. Given partial overlap between patients receiving cannabinoids for pain management and individuals using cannabinoids for other reasons, lessons from the crisis of oversupply and overuse of opioids in some parts of the world emphasize the need to broadly consider harms evidence from real-world settings. The advancement of research on cannabinoid harms will serve to guide optimal approaches to the use of cannabinoids for pain management. In the meantime, this evidence should be carefully examined when making risk-benefit considerations about the use of cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine for chronic pain.

The relationship between obstructive sleep apnoea and postoperative delirium and pain: an observational study of a surgical cohort

Patients with obstructive sleep apnoea are at increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes, such as cardiac and respiratory complications. It has been hypothesised that obstructive sleep apnoea also increases the risk for postoperative delirium and acute postoperative pain. We conducted a retrospective, observational study investigating the relationship of obstructive sleep apnoea with postoperative delirium and acute postoperative pain severity. Patients were classified as being at high risk for obstructive sleep apnoea if they had been diagnosed with this condition, or if they were positive for more than four factors using the 'STOP-BANG' screening tool. Adjusted logistic regression was used to investigate the association between obstructive sleep apnoea and postoperative delirium, and multivariable linear regression to study the relationship between obstructive sleep apnoea and postoperative pain severity. The incidence of postoperative delirium was 307 in 1441 patients (21.3%; 95%CI 19.2-23.5%). In unadjusted analysis, high risk for obstructive sleep apnoea was associated with delirium, with an odds ratio (95%CI) of 1.77 (1.22-2.57; p = 0.003). After adjustment for pre-specified variables, the association was not statistically significant with odds ratio 1.34 (0.80-2.23; p = 0.27). The mean (SD) maximum pain (resting or provoked) reported for the entire cohort was 63.8 (27.9) mm on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale. High risk for obstructive sleep apnoea was not associated with postoperative pain severity (β-coefficient 2.82; 95%CI, -2.34-7.97; p = 0.28). These findings suggest that obstructive sleep apnoea is unlikely to be a strong risk factor for postoperative delirium or acute postoperative pain severity.

Diagnostic criteria for idiopathic small fiber neuropathy: A systematic review

Idiopathic small fiber neuropathy (iSFN) lacks broadly accepted diagnostic criteria, which hinders its timely diagnosis and treatment. A systematic literature review was performed to assess the published screening and diagnostic criteria for iSFN, excluding studies where SFN was of well-established etiology. Eighty-four clinical studies and seven guideline/review publications were included in this systematic review. Substantial heterogeneity existed in iSFN diagnostic criteria. The most common set of criteria to diagnose iSFN [presence of any symptoms of iSFN, absence of large fiber involvement, and reduced intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD)] was used in only 14% of studies. Mandatory individual criteria to confirm iSFN included any sensory symptoms (60% of studies), pain (19% of studies), small fiber signs (20% of studies), absence of large fiber signs (62% of studies), reduced IENFD (38% of studies), and autonomic symptoms (1% of studies). This review highlights a clear need for standardized, evidence-based guidelines for diagnosing iSFN.

Methadone for chronic non-cancer pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Methadone belongs to a class of analgesics known as opioids, that are considered the cornerstone of therapy for moderate-to-severe pain due to life-threatening illnesses; however, their use in chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is controversial. Methadone has many characteristics that differentiate it from other opioids, which suggests that it may have a different efficacy and safety profile.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic effectiveness and safety of methadone in the treatment of CNCP.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of methadone use in chronic pain by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library 2011, issue 11, MEDLINE (1950 to November 2011), and EMBASE (1980 to November 2011), together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with pain assessment as either the primary or secondary outcome. Quasi-randomized studies, cohorts and case-control trials were also considered for inclusion because we suspected that the beneficial and harmful effects of methadone in CNCP may not be adequately addressed in RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data and assessed risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two RCTs and one non-randomized study, involving a total of 181 participants. Both RCTs were cross-over studies, one involving 19 participants with diverse neuropathic pain syndromes, the other involving 76 participants with postherpetic neuralgia. Study phases were 20 days and approximately eight weeks, respectively. The non-randomized study retrospectively evaluated 86 outpatients over an average of 8.8 ± 6.3 months.One RCT reported average pain intensity and pain relief, and found statistically significant improvements versus placebo for both outcomes, with 10 mg and 20 mg daily doses of methadone. The second RCT reported differences in pain reduction between methadone and morphine and found morphine to be statistically superior. The non-randomized study found that in patients initially prescribed methadone it was effective in fewer participants than in those initially prescribed other long-acting opioids (28% versus 42%, 33% and 50% for morphine, oxycodone and transdermal fentanyl, respectively).One RCT compared incidences for several individual adverse events, but found a difference between methadone and placebo for only one event, dizziness (P = 0.041).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The three studies provide very limited evidence of the efficacy of methadone for CNCP, and there were too few data for pooled analysis of efficacy or harm, or to have confidence in the results of the individual studies. No conclusions can be made regarding differences in efficacy or safety between methadone and placebo, other opioids, or other treatments.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on chronic pain in Spain: a scoping review

The COVID-19 outbreak has been a great challenge in the management of chronic pain patients. We have conducted a rapid scoping review to assess the impact of the pandemic (and the associated public health measures) on the health status and management practices of chronic pain patients in Spain. To this end, we performed a bibliographic search in LitCOVID and PubMed, and reviewed official websites and documents, and expert reports. The review showed that (1) the studies consistently indicate that the pandemic has had a very negative impact on the physical and psychological health of chronic pain patients; (2) there are scarce data on how the pandemic affected pain unit consultations and a lack of protocols to organize health care in the face of future waves of contagion, with little implementation of telehealth. We make proposals to improve management of chronic pain patients in pandemic situations, which should pivot around 3 axes: (1) a coordinated response of all the relevant stakeholders to define a future roadmap and research priorities, (2) a biopsychosocial approach in pain management, and (3) development and implementation of novel telemedicine solutions.

Persistent Opioid Use After Spine Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center, investigator-initiated, prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine patient-reported reasons for persistent opioid use following elective spine surgery, assess the frequency of withdrawal symptoms, and characterize pain-related care sought after discharge.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Patients are often prescribed opioids at discharge from hospital following surgery. Several studies have shown that a large number of patients fail to discontinue opioid treatment and use opioids even months to years after surgery. Spine surgery has proven to be a high-risk procedure in regard to persistent opioid use. There is, however, limited evidence on why patients continue to take opioids.

METHODS

Three hundred patients, scheduled to undergo spine surgery at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, were included. Baseline characteristics and discharge data on opioid consumption were collected. Data on opioid consumption, patient-reported reasons for opioid use, withdrawal symptoms, and pain-related care sought were collected at 3- and 6-month follow-up via a REDCap survey.

RESULTS

Before surgery, opioid use was reported in 53% of patients. Three months after surgery, opioid use was reported in 60% of preoperative opioid-users and in 9% of preoperative opioid non-users. Patients reported the following reasons for postoperative opioid use: treatment of surgery-related pain (53%), treatment of surgery-related pain combined with other reasons (37%), and reasons not related to spine surgery (10%). Withdrawal symptoms were experienced by 33% of patients during the first 3 months after surgery and were associated with failure to discontinue opioid treatment (P < 0.001). Half of patients (52%) contacted health care after discharge with pain-related topics the first 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Patients use opioids after spine surgery for reasons other than surgery-related pain. Withdrawal symptoms are frequent even though patients are given tapering plans at discharge. Further studies should address how to facilitate successful and safe opioid tapering in patients undergoing spine surgery.Level of Evidence: 3.

Cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicine for pain management: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews and a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Pain is an experience that affects many people worldwide and is associated with higher mortality and lower quality of life. Cannabinoid, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) are thought to reduce pain, but a proliferation of different products has led to variability in trials, creating a challenge when determining the assessment of efficacy in systematic reviews. We will conduct 2 systematic reviews commissioned by the International Association for the Study of Pain Task Force on the use of cannabinoids, cannabis, and CBMs for pain management: first, an overview review of systematic reviews to summarise the evidence base and second, a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of cannabinoids, cannabis, and CBMs. In these reviews we will determine the harm and benefit of CBM from the current literature and will interpret the findings in light of the quality of evidence and reviews included. We will search online databases and registries in any language for systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials. We will include studies that evaluate any cannabinoid or CBM vs any control for people with acute and chronic pain. Our primary outcomes for both reviews are the number of participants achieving (1) a 30% and (2) 50% reduction in pain intensity, (3) moderate improvement, and (4) substantial improvement. A number of secondary outcome measures will also be included. We will assess risk of bias and quality of evidence. We will analyse data using fixed and random effect models, with separate comparators for cannabis and CBMs. Prospero ID (CRD42019124710; CRD42019124714).

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: Focal and Segmental Disorders

Peripheral neuropathic pain is among the most prevalent types of neuropathic pain. No comprehensive peripheral neuropathic pain classification system that incorporates contemporary clinical, diagnostic, biological, and psychological information exists. To address this need, this article covers the taxonomy for 4 focal or segmental peripheral neuropathic pain disorders, as part of the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership and the American Pain Society (APS) collaborative to develop a standardized, evidence-based taxonomy initiative: the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT). The disorders-postherpetic neuralgia, persistent posttraumatic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain disorder, and trigeminal neuralgia-were selected because of their clinical and clinical research relevance. The multidimensional features of the taxonomy are suitable for clinical trials and can also facilitate hypothesis-driven case-control and cohort epidemiologic studies. PERSPECTIVE: The AAPT peripheral neuropathic pain taxonomy subdivides the peripheral neuropathic pain disorders into those that are generalized and symmetric and those that are focal or segmental and asymmetric. In this article, we cover the focal and segmental disorders: postherpetic neuralgia, persistent posttraumatic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain disorder, and trigeminal neuralgia. The taxonomy is evidence-based and multidimensional, with the following dimensions: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.