Dataset Information

Improvement in pain severity category in clinical trials of pregabalin.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Pregabalin is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM), diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), and neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury (SCI). Approval was based on clinical trial data demonstrating statistically significant differences in pain scores versus placebo. However, statistically significant pain relief may not always equate to clinically meaningful pain relief. To further characterize the clinical benefit of pregabalin, this analysis examined shifts in pain severity categories in patients with FM, DPN/PHN (pooled in this analysis), and SCI treated with pregabalin. METHODS:Data were pooled from 23 placebo-controlled trials in patients with FM (1,623 treated with pregabalin, 937 placebo), DPN/PHN (2,867 pregabalin, 1,532 placebo), or SCI (181 pregabalin, 175 placebo). Pain scores were assessed on an 11-point numeric rating scale and categorized as mild (0 to <4), moderate (4 to <7), or severe (7 to 10). Only patients with mean score ?4 at baseline were randomized to treatment. The percentage of patients shifting pain category from baseline to endpoint for pregabalin and placebo was analyzed using a modified ridit transformation with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel procedure. RESULTS:A higher proportion of patients shifted to a less severe pain category at endpoint with pregabalin compared with placebo. With flexible-dose pregabalin, the percentage of patients improving from: severe to mild (pregabalin versus placebo) was 15.8 versus 13.4 in FM patients, 36.0 versus 16.6 in DPN/PHN patients, 14.3 versus 7.7 in SCI patients; severe to moderate was 28.7 versus 28.2 in FM patients, 32.5 versus 28.2 in DPN/PHN patients, 35.7 versus 28.2 in SCI patients; and moderate to mild was 38.3 versus 26.4 in FM patients, 59.5 versus 41.4 in DPN/PHN patients, 38.6 versus 27.2 in SCI patients. CONCLUSION:Compared with placebo, pregabalin is more often associated with clinically meaningful improvements in pain category in patients with FM, DPN, PHN, or SCI.

SUBMITTER: Parsons B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5063480 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improvement in pain severity category in clinical trials of pregabalin.

Parsons Bruce B Argoff Charles E CE Clair Andrew A Emir Birol B

Journal of pain research 20161007

<h4>Background</h4>Pregabalin is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM), diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), and neuropathic pain due to spinal cord injury (SCI). Approval was based on clinical trial data demonstrating statistically significant differences in pain scores versus placebo. However, statistically significant pain relief may not always equate to clinically meaningful pain relief. To further characterize t ...[more]

PMID: 27785092

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCharacterizing relationships between pain relief and function can inform patient management decisions. This analysis explored graphically the relationship between pain relief and functional improvement in patients with neuropathic pain associated with spinal cord injury in two clinical trials of pregabalin.MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of two randomized, double-blind, clinical trials in patients who were treated with pregabalin (n=181) or placebo (n=172) for neuropathic pain associated with spinal cord injury. The bivariate relationship between percent pain relief and absolute change in the functional outcomes with placebo and pregabalin was evaluated graphically using scatter plots, and loess curves illustrated the extent of the relationship between pain and function. Linear trend analysis evaluated the statistical significance of these relationships using Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT)-based thresholds of pain reduction (<15%, 15% <30%, 30% to <50%, and ≥50%). Outcome measures included modified Brief Pain Inventory pain interference with function in one of the studies and the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for the pooled studies.ResultsData ellipses showed a shift with pregabalin relative to placebo toward greater improvement with increasing pain relief for all outcome measures except HADS. Loess curves suggested a relationship between increased pain relief and improved function except for HADS, with the clearest relationship observed for sleep. Linear trend analysis showed significant relationships between pain and Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (P<0.0001) and between pain and function on the modified Brief Pain Inventory Interference Index and most individual items (P<0.05).ConclusionGreater functional improvements were generally achieved at higher levels of clinically significant pain reduction. Pregabalin resulted in shifts from placebo toward greater functional improvement with greater pain relief.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pregabalin is an effective treatment option for many patients with neuropathic pain. Higher doses of pregabalin have been shown to be more effective in improving pain outcomes but, in practice, failing to appropriately increase the dose can leave patients under-treated. METHODS:This was a pooled analysis of 6 flexible-dose clinical trials of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain (diabetic peripheral neuropathy, peripheral herpetic neuralgia, posttraumatic pain, or postsurgical pain). Patients were divided into "dose pathway" groups based on their weekly pregabalin dose from the start of their trial to the first week of their maintenance phase. These were: 150 mg/day only; 150 to 300 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 450 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 450 to 600 mg/day; 150 to 300 to 600 mg/day; 300 to 600 mg/day. Pain outcomes assessed for each group at each new dose were proportion of 30% and 50% responders (?30% or ?50% reduction in mean pain score from baseline) and mean change in pain score. Percent change in mean pain score from baseline was assessed using a marginal structural model. RESULTS:Seven hundred and sixty-one patients treated with flexible-dose pregabalin were included in the analysis. For each dose pathway group, there was a notably greater proportion of 30% and 50% responders and change in pain score, at each escalating dose. As assessed by the marginal structural model, higher doses of pregabalin were estimated to result in a significantly greater change in mean pain score at each week. This dose response with flexible-dose pregabalin was consistent with that previously observed with fixed-dose pregabalin. CONCLUSION:Many patients who do not respond to lower doses of pregabalin will respond with notable improvements in pain outcomes when the dose is escalated. These data should encourage physicians treating patients with neuropathic pain to escalate pregabalin to the dose that delivers optimal analgesia and tolerable side effects.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain.DesignRapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.ParticipantsAdults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria.InterventionsPregabalin or placebo.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOur primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events.ResultsWe included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence).ConclusionPregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.

Project description:BackgroundPregabalin is worldwidely licensed for the treatment of a variety of pain syndromes and supposed to be a potential candidate for the centrally mediated abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS).ObjectivesTo investigate the efficacy of pregabalin on nociceptive and emotional symptoms in CAPS patients.DesignThis is an open-label randomized controlled trial.MethodsCAPS patients were randomized to receive pregabalin 75 mg (P group), pinaverium bromide 50 mg (PB group), or pregabalin combined pinaverium bromide regimen (P + PB group) three times daily for 4 weeks. Questionnaires were completed biweekly. The primary outcomes were defined as the average abdominal pain scores of severity and frequency at weeks 2 and 4. Secondary outcomes included the reduction in abdominal pain scores, Somatic Self-rating Scale (SSS), Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale 7 (GAD-7) scales obtained at the end of trial to the baseline.ResultsTotally, 102 eligible patients were recruited and randomized. The mean severity scores of abdominal pain were 1.39 ± 1.28, 0.97 ± 1.43 versus 2.91 ± 1.44 (p < 0.0001) in P or PB + P group versus PB group at week 2 and were 0.90 ± 1.21, 1.28 ± 1.87 versus 2.74 ± 1.75 (p < 0.0001) at week 4. The mean frequency scores were 2.55 ± 2.55, 2.03 ± 2.80 versus 5.12 ± 2.09(p < 0.0001) in P or PB + P group versus PB group at week 2 and were 1.72 ± 2.46, 2.00 ± 2.90 versus 4.55 ± 2.55 (p < 0.0001) at week 4. When comparing the changes in SSS, PHQ-15, and GAD-7 scores, patients accepting pregabalin or pregabalin combination regimen reported a more decrease than pinaverium bromide recipients (p = 0.0002, p = 0.0002, and p = 0.0033).ConclusionThis trial suggests that pregabalin may be beneficial for CAPS abdominal pain and concomitant somatic or anxiety symptoms.Registrationwww.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR1900028026).

Project description:BackgroundPregabalin is a drug used to treat neuropathic pain, and its use has increased substantially since 2007. Early trials found a strong treatment effect on pain for post-herpetic neuralgia and diabetic neuropathy. However more recent studies have failed to replicate these results.MethodsThis meta-epidemiological study aimed to assess change in the reported effectiveness of pregabalin in neuropathic pain trials over time, and if a change is present, determine any associated factors.Data sourcesWe performed electronic searches for published trials in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases; and unpublished trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry with no restrictions.Study selectionWe included randomized, placebo-controlled trials of pregabalin for treatment of neuropathic pain in adults.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently extracted study data: sample size and mean baseline, end-point and change in pain scores with measures of variance, trial end year, publication year, clinical indication, funding source, country of study, treatment duration, treatment dose, mean age and percentage male.Primary outcome measureWe defined treatment effect as the mean difference in pain scores between pregabalin and placebo groups at trial end-point and assessed for change over time using a random-effects meta-regression, adjusted for sample size, indication, treatment duration (weeks) and treatment dose.ResultsWe included 38 randomized published trials (9038 participants) and found that between 2003 and 2020, the reported treatment effect of pregabalin decreased by 0.4 points (95% CI: 0.3 to 0.6; p<0.001) on an 11-point pain scale per 5-year interval, from 1.3 points (95% CI: 1.0 to 1.5) in trials conducted in 2001-2005, to 0.3 (95% CI: -0.1 to 0.7) in trials conducted in 2016-2020. The reported treatment effect was lower than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 1.7 points across all time periods, doses and most indications and was not found to be associated with study characteristics.ConclusionsThe reported treatment effect or analgesic efficacy of pregabalin from clinical trials has diminished over time. Clinical recommendations may need to be re-evaluated to account for recent evidence and to consider whether pregabalin therapy is indicated.

Project description:BackgroundWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin for pain management following spine surgery.MethodsIn September 2016, a systematic computer-based search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. RCTs of patients prepared for spine surgery that compared pregabalin with placebo were retrieved. The primary endpoint was the VAS score with rest or mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes were complications of nausea, sedation, dizziness, headache, and visual disturbances. After testing for publication bias and heterogeneity between studies, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary.ResultsTen clinical studies with 535 patients (pregabalin group = 294, control group = 241) were included in the meta-analysis. Pregabalin was associated with reduced pain scores at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours, corresponding to a reduction of 1.91 points (95% CI, -4.07 to 0.24 point) at 12 hours, 2.66 points (95% CI, -4.51 to -0.81 point) at 24 hours, and 4.33 points (95% confidence interval, -6.38 to -2.99 point) at 48 hours on a 100-point numeric rating scale. There was no significant difference between VAS scores with mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, or 48 hours. Similarly, pregabalin was associated with a reduction in cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours (-7.07, 95% CI -9.84, -4.30) and 48 hours (-6.52, 95% CI -7.78, -5.25, P = 0.000). Furthermore, pregabalin can reduce the occurrence of nausea (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41, 0.79, P = 0.001, number needed to treat = 8.4). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of sedation, dizziness, headache, or visual disturbances.ConclusionsPreoperative use of pregabalin was efficacious in reduction of postoperative pain, total morphine consumption, and the occurrence of nausea following spine surgery. Because the sample size and the number of included studies were limited, a multicenter RCT is needed to identify the effects and optimal dose of pregabalin for reducing acute pain after spine surgery.

Dataset Information

Improvement in pain severity category in clinical trials of pregabalin.

Publications

Improvement in pain severity category in clinical trials of pregabalin.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets