Finnerup Nanna B, Attal Nadine, Haroutounian Simon, McNicol Ewan, Baron Ralf, Dworkin Robert H, Gilron Ian, Haanpää Maija, Hansson Per, Jensen Troels S, Kamerman Peter R, Lund Karen, Moore Andrew, Raja Srinivasa N, Rice Andrew S C, Rowbotham Michael, Sena Emily, Siddall Philip, Smith Blair H, Wallace Mark
Danish Pain Research Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
INSERM U-987, Centre d'Evaluation et de Traitement de la Douleur, Hôpital Ambroise Paré, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Boulogne-Billancourt, France; Université Versailles Saint-Quentin, France.
Lancet Neurol. 2015 Feb;14(2):162-73. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70251-0. Epub 2015 Jan 7.
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.
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pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January, 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies.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.
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 Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater effects than did unpublished studies (r(2) 9·3%, p=0·009).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.
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.
NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain.
新药治疗、临床试验以及证据评估的质量标准表明,对于神经性疼痛的药物治疗,基于证据的推荐意见需要更新。我们运用推荐意见分级评估、制定与评价(GRADE)方法,根据一项系统评价和荟萃分析的结果,修订了神经性疼痛特别兴趣小组(NeuPSIG)关于神经性疼痛药物治疗的推荐意见。
2013年4月至2014年1月期间,国际疼痛研究协会的NeuPSIG对口服和外用药物治疗神经性疼痛的随机双盲研究进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,包括1966年1月以来发表在同行评审期刊上的研究,以及从ClinicalTrials.gov和制药公司网站检索到的未发表试验。我们将疼痛缓解50%所需的治疗人数(NNT)作为主要衡量指标,并评估发表偏倚;NNT采用固定效应Mantel-Haenszel方法计算。
荟萃分析纳入了229项研究。发表偏倚分析表明治疗效果高估了10%。发表在同行评审期刊上的研究报告的效果比未发表的研究更大(r² 9.3%,p = 0.009)。试验结果总体较为一般:特别是,5-羟色胺-去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(主要包括度洛西汀,14项研究中的9项)的联合NNT为6.4(95%CI 5.2-8.4);普瑞巴林为7.7(6.5-9.4);加巴喷丁(包括缓释加巴喷丁和依那卡比)为7.2(5.9-9.21);高浓度辣椒素贴剂为10.6(7.4-19.0)。三环类抗抑郁药、强效阿片类药物、曲马多和A型肉毒毒素的NNT较低,利多卡因贴剂的NNT未确定。基于GRADE,除利多卡因贴剂外,所有治疗的最终证据质量为中等或高;外用药物的耐受性、安全性以及价值和偏好更高;三环类抗抑郁药和曲马多的成本更低。这些结果使得强烈推荐三环类抗抑郁药、5-羟色胺-去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂、普瑞巴林和加巴喷丁用于神经性疼痛并建议作为一线治疗;对利多卡因贴剂、高浓度辣椒素贴剂和曲马多作为二线治疗的使用和建议为弱推荐;对强效阿片类药物和A型肉毒毒素作为三线治疗的使用和建议为弱推荐。外用药物和A型肉毒毒素仅推荐用于周围神经性疼痛。
我们的结果支持修订NeuPSIG关于神经性疼痛药物治疗的推荐意见。药物治疗反应不足是神经性疼痛患者中一项尚未得到满足的重大需求。疗效一般、安慰剂反应大、诊断标准异质性以及表型分析不佳可能是试验结果中等的原因,未来研究应予以考虑。
国际疼痛研究协会的NeuPSIG。