Characterization of Hyperacute Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord Injury: A Prospective Study

There is currently a lack of information regarding neuropathic pain in the very early stages of spinal cord injury (SCI). In the present study, neuropathic pain was assessed using the Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) for the patient's worst pain within the first 5 days of injury (i.e., hyperacute) and on follow-up at 3, 6, and 12 months. Within the hyperacute time frame (i.e., 5 days), at- and below-level neuropathic pain were reported as the worst pain in 23% (n = 18) and 5% (n = 4) of individuals with SCI, respectively. Compared to the neuropathic pain observed in this hyperacute setting, late presenting neuropathic pain was characterized by more intense painful electrical and cold sensations, but less itching sensations. Phenotypic differences between acute and late neuropathic pain support the incorporation of timing into a mechanism-based classification of neuropathic pain after SCI. The diagnosis of acute neuropathic pain after SCI is challenged by the presence of nociceptive and neuropathic pains, with the former potentially masking the latter. This may lead to an underestimation of the incidence of neuropathic pain during the very early, hyperacute time points post-injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01279811) PERSPECTIVE: This article presents distinct pain phenotypes of hyperacute and late presenting neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury and highlights the challenges of pain assessments in the acute phase after injury. This information may be relevant to clinical trial design and broaden our understanding of neuropathic pain mechanisms after spinal cord injury.

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.

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.

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.

AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Neuropathic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Acute neuropathic pain is a significant diagnostic challenge, and it is closely related to our understanding of both acute pain and neuropathic pain. Diagnostic criteria for acute neuropathic pain should reflect our mechanistic understanding and provide a framework for research on and treatment of these complex pain conditions.

METHODS

The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the American Pain Society (APS), and the American Academy of Pain Medicine (AAPM) collaborated to develop the ACTTION-APS-AAPM Pain Taxonomy (AAAPT) for acute pain. A working group of experts in research and clinical management of neuropathic pain was convened. Group members used literature review and expert opinion to develop diagnostic criteria for acute neuropathic pain, as well as three specific examples of acute neuropathic pain conditions, using the five dimensions of the AAAPT classification of acute pain.

RESULTS

AAAPT diagnostic criteria for acute neuropathic pain are presented. Application of these criteria to three specific conditions (pain related to herpes zoster, chemotherapy, and limb amputation) illustrates the spectrum of acute neuropathic pain and highlights unique features of each condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed AAAPT diagnostic criteria for acute neuropathic pain can be applied to various acute neuropathic pain conditions. Both the general and condition-specific criteria may guide future research, assessment, and management of acute neuropathic pain.

Sensory and motor axonal excitability testing in early diabetic neuropathy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to gain insight into the pathophysiology of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and examine the diagnostic value of sensory and motor axonal excitability testing.

METHODS

One hundred and eleven type 2 diabetics with and without DPN (disease duration: 6.36 ± 0.25 years) and 60 controls were included. All participants received a thorough clinical examination including Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) score, nerve conduction studies (NCS), and sensory and motor excitability tests. Patients were compared by the likelihood of neuropathy presence, ranging from no DPN (17), possible/probable DPN (46) to NCS-confirmed DPN (48).

RESULTS

Motor excitability tests showed differences in rheobase and depolarizing threshold electrotonus measures between NCS-confirmed DPN group and controls but no changes in hyperpolarising threshold electrotonus or recovery cycle parameters. Sensory excitability showed even less changes despite pronounced sensory NCS abnormalities. There were only weak correlations between the above motor excitability parameters and clinical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in excitability in the examined patient group were subtle, perhaps because of the relatively short disease duration.

SIGNIFICANCE

Less pronounced excitability changes than NCS suggest that axonal excitability testing is not of diagnostic value for early DPN and does not provide information on the mechanisms.

Axonal swellings are related to type 2 diabetes, but not to distal diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Distal diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP) is a common complication of diabetes with many patients showing a reduction of intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) from skin biopsy, a validated and sensitive diagnostic tool for the assessment of DSP. Axonal swelling ratio is a morphological quantification altered in DSP. It is, however, unclear if axonal swellings are related to diabetes or DSP. The aim of this study was to investigate how axonal swellings in cutaneous nerve fibres are related to type 2 diabetes mellitus, DSP and neuropathic pain in a well-defined cohort of patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A total of 249 participants, from the Pain in Neuropathy Study (UK) and the International Diabetic Neuropathy Consortium (Denmark), underwent a structured neurological examination, nerve conduction studies, quantitative sensory testing and skin biopsy. The study included four groups: healthy control study participants without diabetes (n = 45); participants with type 2 diabetes without DSP (DSP-; n = 31); and participants with evidence of DSP (DSP+; n = 173); the last were further separated into painless DSP+ (n = 74) and painful DSP+ (n = 99). Axonal swellings were defined as enlargements on epidermal-penetrating fibres exceeding 1.5 μm in diameter. Axonal swelling ratio is calculated by dividing the number of axonal swellings by the number of intraepidermal nerve fibres.

RESULTS

Median (IQR) IENFD (fibres/mm) was: 6.7 (5.2-9.2) for healthy control participants; 6.2 (4.4-7.3) for DSP-; 1.3 (0.5-2.2) for painless DSP+; and 0.84 (0.4-1.6) for painful DSP+. Swelling ratios were calculated for all participants and those with IENFD > 1.0 fibre/mm. When only those participants with IENFD > 1.0 fibre/mm were included, the axonal swelling ratio was higher in participants with type 2 diabetes when compared with healthy control participants (p < 0.001); however, there was no difference between DSP- and painless DSP+ participants, or between painless DSP+ and painful DSP+ participants. The axonal swelling ratio correlated weakly with HbA_1c (r = 0.16, p = 0.04), but did not correlate with the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (surrogate measure of DSP severity), BMI or type 2 diabetes duration.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

In individuals with type 2 diabetes where IENFD is >1.0 fibre/mm, axonal swelling ratio is related to type 2 diabetes but is not related to DSP or painful DSP. Axonal swellings may be an early marker of sensory nerve injury in type 2 diabetes.

Painful and non-painful diabetic neuropathy, diagnostic challenges and implications for future management

Peripheral neuropathy is one of the most common complications of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Up to half of patients with diabetes develop neuropathy during the course of their disease, which is accompanied by neuropathic pain in 30-40% of cases. Peripheral nerve injury in diabetes can manifest as progressive distal symmetric polyneuropathy, autonomic neuropathy, radiculo-plexopathies, and mononeuropathies. The most common diabetic neuropathy is distal symmetric polyneuropathy, which we will refer to as DN, with its characteristic glove and stocking like presentation of distal sensory or motor function loss. DN or its painful counterpart, painful DN, are associated with increased mortality and morbidity; thus, early recognition and preventive measures are essential. Nevertheless, it is not easy to diagnose DN or painful DN, particularly in patients with early and mild neuropathy, and there is currently no single established diagnostic gold standard. The most common diagnostic approach in research is a hierarchical system, which combines symptoms, signs, and a series of confirmatory tests. The general lack of long-term prospective studies has limited the evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of new morphometric and neurophysiological techniques. Thus, the best paradigm for screening DN and painful DN both in research and in clinical practice remains uncertain. Herein, we review the diagnostic challenges from both clinical and research perspectives and their implications for managing patients with DN. There is no established DN treatment, apart from improved glycaemic control, which is more effective in type 1 than in type 2 diabetes, and only symptomatic management is available for painful DN. Currently, less than one-third of patients with painful DN derive sufficient pain relief with existing pharmacotherapies. A more precise and distinct sensory profile from patients with DN and painful DN may help identify responsive patients to one treatment versus another. Detailed sensory profiles will lead to tailored treatment for patient subgroups with painful DN by matching to novel or established DN pathomechanisms and also for improved clinical trials stratification. Large randomized clinical trials are needed to identify the interventions, i.e. pharmacological, physical, cognitive, educational, etc., which lead to the best therapeutic outcomes.

Oxaliplatin- and docetaxel-induced polyneuropathy: clinical and neurophysiological characteristics

The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence and characterization of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy (CIPN) and neuropathic pain 5 years after adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel or oxaliplatin. Patients from an ongoing prospective study, who had received adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel or oxaliplatin in 2011 to 2012 were invited to participate. The patients underwent a thorough examination with interview, neurological examination, questionnaires, assessment tools, nerve conduction studies (NCS), quantitative sensory testing, MScan motor unit number estimation (MUNE), and corneal confocal microscopy (CCM). Patients were divided into no, possible, probable, and confirmed CIPN. Out of the 132 eligible patients, 63 agreed to participate: 28 had received docetaxel and 35 had received oxaliplatin. Forty-one percent had confirmed CIPN, 34% possible or probable CIPN, and 22% did not have CIPN. The CIPN was characterized mainly by sensory nerve fiber loss, with a more pronounced large fiber than small fiber loss but also some motor fiber loss identified on NCS and MUNE. In general, patients had mild neuropathy with relatively low scores on assessment tools and no association with mood and quality of life. CCM was not useful as a diagnostic tool. Of the patients with probable or confirmed CIPN, 30% experienced pain, which was most often mild, but still interfered moderately with daily life in 20% to 25% and was associated with lower quality of life. In conclusion CIPN was confirmed in 41% 5 years after chemotherapy. The neuropathy was generally mild, but in patients with neuropathic pain it was associated with lower quality of life.

Diagnosis and prevalence of diabetic polyneuropathy: a cross-sectional study of Danish patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is a common complication of diabetes. Using the Toronto criteria for diabetic polyneuropathy and the grading system for neuropathic pain, the performance of neuropathy scales and questionnaires were assessed by comparing them to a clinical gold standard diagnosis of DPN and painful DPN in a cohort of patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A questionnaire on neuropathy and pain was sent to a cohort of 5514 Danish type 2 diabetes patients. A sample of 389 patients underwent a detailed clinical examination and completed neuropathy questionnaires and scales.

RESULTS

Of the 389 patients with a median diabetes duration of 5.9 years, 126 had definite DPN (including 53 with painful DPN), 88 had probable DPN and 53 had possible DPN. There were 49 patients with other causes of polyneuropathy, neuropathy symptoms or pain, 10 with subclinical DPN and 63 without DPN. The sensitivity of the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire to detect DPN was 25.7% and the specificity 84.6%. The sensitivity of the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Scoring System, including questionnaire and clinical examination, was 62.9% and the specificity was 74.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetic polyneuropathy affects approximately one in five Danish patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes but neuropathic pain is not as common as previously reported. Neuropathy scales with clinical examination perform better compared with questionnaires alone, but better scales are needed for future epidemiological studies.

MScanFit motor unit number estimation and muscle velocity recovery cycle recordings in diabetic polyneuropathy

OBJECTIVE

Motor Unit Number Estimation (MUNE) methods may be valuable in tracking motor unit loss in diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN). Muscle Velocity Recovery Cycles (MVRCs) provide information about muscle membrane properties. This study aimed to examine the utility of the MScanFit MUNE in detecting motor unit loss and to test whether the MVRCs could improve understanding of DPN pathophysiology.

METHODS

Seventy-nine type-2 diabetic patients were compared to 32 control subjects. All participants were examined with MScanFit MUNE and MVRCs in anterior tibial muscle. Lower limb nerve conduction studies (NCS) in peroneal, tibial and sural nerves were applied to diagnose large fiber neuropathy.

RESULTS

NCS confirmed DPN for 47 patients (DPN + ), with 32 not showing DPN (DPN-). MScanFit showed significantly decreased MUNE values and increased motor unit sizes, when comparing DPN + patients with controls (MUNE = 71.3 ± 4.7 vs 122.7 ± 3.8), and also when comparing DPN- patients (MUNE = 103.2 ± 5.1) with controls. MVRCs did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MScanFit is more sensitive in showing motor unit loss than NCS in type-2 diabetic patients, whereas MVRCs do not provide additional information.

SIGNIFICANCE

The MScanFit results suggest that motor changes are seen as early as sensory, and the role of axonal membrane properties in DPN pathophysiology should be revisited.

Metabolic Factors, Lifestyle Habits, and Possible Polyneuropathy in Early Type 2 Diabetes: A Nationwide Study of 5,249 Patients in the Danish Centre for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes (DD2) Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of metabolic and lifestyle factors with possible diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and neuropathic pain in patients with early type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We thoroughly characterized 6,726 patients with recently diagnosed diabetes. After a median of 2.8 years, we sent a detailed questionnaire on neuropathy, including the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq), to identify possible DPN (score ≥4) and the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4) questionnaire for possible associated neuropathic pain (MNSIq ≥4 + pain in both feet + DN4 score ≥3).

RESULTS

Among 5,249 patients with data on both DPN and pain, 17.9% (n = 938) had possible DPN, including 7.4% (n = 386) with possible neuropathic pain. In regression analyses, central obesity (waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, and waist-to-height ratio) was markedly associated with DPN. Other important metabolic factors associated with DPN included hypertriglyceridemia ≥1.7 mmol/L, adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) 1.36 (95% CI 1.17; 1.59); decreased HDL cholesterol <1.0/1.2 mmol/L (male/female), aPR 1.35 (95% CI 1.12; 1.62); hs-CRP ≥3.0 mg/L, aPR 1.66 (95% CI 1.42; 1.94); C-peptide ≥1,550 pmol/L, aPR 1.72 (95% CI 1.43; 2.07); HbA_1c ≥78 mmol/mol, aPR 1.42 (95% CI 1.06; 1.88); and antihypertensive drug use, aPR 1.34 (95% CI 1.16; 1.55). Smoking, aPR 1.50 (95% CI 1.24; 1.81), and lack of physical activity (0 vs. ≥3 days/week), aPR 1.61 (95% CI 1.39; 1.85), were also associated with DPN. Smoking, high alcohol intake, and failure to increase activity after diabetes diagnosis associated with neuropathic pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Possible DPN was associated with metabolic syndrome factors, insulin resistance, inflammation, and modifiable lifestyle habits in early type 2 diabetes.

Long-term symptoms of polyneuropathy in breast and colorectal cancer patients treated with and without adjuvant chemotherapy

Background

The aim of this study was to assess chemotherapy‐induced polyneuropathy (CIPN) 5 years after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast and colorectal cancer. The association of CIPN with quality of life, anxiety, and depression was analyzed.

Methods

Of a set of 100 patients with breast cancer and of 74 with colorectal cancer who had undergone surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy in 2011‐2012, 80 and 52 patients alive, respectively, were included together with two reference groups of 249 breast cancer patients and 83 colorectal cancer patients who had undergone surgery only. All patients were sent a questionnaire on alcohol consumption, smoking habits, comorbidity, medicine consumption, and oxaliplatin‐specific questions, as well as the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq), the Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4q), the EQ‐5D, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Possible polyneuropathy was defined as the presence of numbness and/or tingling in the feet, secondly as a score of ≥4 on the MNSIq. Possible painful polyneuropathy was defined as pain in both feet and a score ≥3 on the DN4q.

Results

The prevalence of possible polyneuropathy defined by numbness and/or tingling in the feet was 38.8% (28.1‐50.3) after adjuvant docetaxel and 57.7% (43.2‐71.3) after adjuvant oxaliplatin, with no significant difference from a previous 1‐year follow‐up (P >.35). Fewer had possible polyneuropathy as defined by the MNSIq. Patients with possible polyneuropathy after adjuvant chemotherapy reported significantly lower quality of life than patients treated with surgery only.

Conclusion

Symptoms of polyneuropathy following adjuvant docetaxel and oxaliplatin persist 5 years after treatment and affect quality of life negatively.

Cold aggravates abnormal excitability of motor axons in oxaliplatin-treated patients

INTRODUCTION

Cold allodynia is often seen in the acute phase of oxaliplatin treatment, but the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for adjuvant oxaliplatin for colorectal cancer were examined with quantitative sensory testing and nerve excitability tests at baseline and after the second or third oxaliplatin cycle at different skin temperatures.

RESULTS

Seven patients were eligible for examination. All patients felt evoked pain and tingling when touching something cold after oxaliplatin infusion. Oxaliplatin decreased motor nerve superexcitability (P < .001), increased relative refractory period (P = .011), and caused neuromyotonia-like after-activity. Cooling exacerbated these changes and prolonged the accommodation half-time.

DISCUSSION

The findings suggest that a combined effect of oxaliplatin and cooling facilitates nerve excitability changes and neuromyotonia-like after-activity in peripheral nerve axons. A possible mechanism is the slowing in gating of voltage-dependent fast sodium and slow potassium channels, which results in symptoms of cold allodynia.

Pain thresholds and intensities of CRPS type I and neuropathic pain in respect to sex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Healthy women have generally been found to have increased experimental pain perception and chronic pain has a higher prevalence in female as compared to male patients. However, no study has investigated whether pain intensity and pain perception thresholds are distinct or similar between sexes within various chronic pain entities. We investigated whether average pain intensities and pain thresholds assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST) differed between women and men suffering from three distinct chronic pain conditions: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS type I), peripheral nerve injury (PNI) or polyneuropathy (PNP), as compared to paired healthy volunteers.

METHODS

QST data of 1,252 patients (669 female, 583 male) with PNI (n = 342), PNP (n = 571) or CRPS (n = 339), and average pain intensity reports from previously published studies were included. Absolute and z-values (adjusted for age and body region) of cold, heat, pressure (PPT) and pinprick pain thresholds were compared in generalized linear models with aetiology, duration of underlying pain disease and average pain intensity as fixed effects.

RESULTS

Average pain intensity during the past four weeks did not differ between women and men, in both mean and range. In women absolute pain thresholds for cold, heat and pinprick were lower than in males across all diagnoses (p < .05). However, after z-transformation these differences disappeared except for PPT in CRPS (p = .001).

DISCUSSION

Pain thresholds in patients show only minor sex differences. However, these differences mimic those observed in healthy subjects and do not seem to be linked to specific pathophysiological processes.

SIGNIFICANCE

Female healthy participants and female patients with neuropathic pain conditions or CRPS I report lower pain thresholds compared to males, but pain intensity is similar and there is no sex difference in the extent to which the thresholds are altered in neuropathic pain or CRPS. Thus, the sex differences observed in various chronic pain conditions mimic those obtained in healthy participants, indicating that these differences are not linked to specific pathophysiological processes and are of minor clinical relevance.

The Genetics of Neuropathic Pain from Model Organisms to Clinical Application

Neuropathic pain (NeuP) arises due to injury of the somatosensory nervous system and is both common and disabling, rendering an urgent need for non-addictive, effective new therapies. Given the high evolutionary conservation of pain, investigative approaches from Drosophila mutagenesis to human Mendelian genetics have aided our understanding of the maladaptive plasticity underlying NeuP. Successes include the identification of ion channel variants causing hyper-excitability and the importance of neuro-immune signaling. Recent developments encompass improved sensory phenotyping in animal models and patients, brain imaging, and electrophysiology-based pain biomarkers, the collection of large well-phenotyped population cohorts, neurons derived from patient stem cells, and high-precision CRISPR generated genetic editing. We will discuss how to harness these resources to understand the pathophysiological drivers of NeuP, define its relationship with comorbidities such as anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders, and explore how to apply these findings to the prediction, diagnosis, and treatment of NeuP in the clinic.

Effect of lacosamide in peripheral neuropathic pain: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled, phenotype-stratified trial

Background

Neuropathic pain is a common pain condition that has a major negative impact on health-related quality of life. However, despite decades of research, it remains difficult to treat neuropathic pain. Lacosamide is a sodium-channel blocker that is efficacious in animal models of neuropathic pain. In humans, its effect in neuropathic pain is inconclusive, based on inconsistent results and very large placebo responses. Previous trials have not used patient stratification or looked for predictors for response.

Methods

This study will be conducted as a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, phase 2, proof-of-concept, phenotype-stratified study. The study will enroll 108 patients with peripheral neuropathic pain who will be randomized to a 12-week treatment with lacosamide or placebo up to 400 mg/day in a 2:1 ratio. The primary objective is to compare the change in the mean value of the patients’ daily ratings of average pain intensity from baseline to the last week of treatment in patients with and without the irritable nociceptor phenotype in the per-protocol population. A supportive objective is to compare the effect of lacosamide with that of placebo in the two phenotypes. Secondary and tertiary outcomes include the Patient Global Impression of Change, pain relief, presence of 30% and 50% pain reduction, sleep disturbance, depression, and anxiety.

Discussion

We will examine the concept of individualized therapy based on phenotyping, and expect that this study will provide important information on the usefulness of lacosamide in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03777956. Registered on 18 December 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3695-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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).

DOLORisk: study protocol for a multi-centre observational study to understand the risk factors and determinants of neuropathic pain

Background: Neuropathic pain is an increasingly prevalent condition and has a major impact on health and quality of life. However, the risk factors for the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain are poorly understood. Clinical, genetic and psychosocial factors all contribute to chronic pain, but their interactions have not been studied in large cohorts. The DOLORisk study aims to study these factors. Protocol: Multicentre cross-sectional and longitudinal cohorts covering the main causes leading to neuropathic pain (e.g. diabetes, surgery, chemotherapy, traumatic injury), as well as rare conditions, follow a common protocol for phenotyping of the participants. This core protocol correlates answers given by the participants on a set of questionnaires with the results of their genetic analyses. A smaller number of participants undergo deeper phenotyping procedures, including neurological examination, nerve conduction studies, threshold tracking, quantitative sensory testing, conditioned pain modulation and electroencephalography. Ethics and dissemination: All studies have been approved by their regional ethics committees as required by national law. Results are disseminated through the DOLORisk website, scientific meetings, open-access publications, and in partnership with patient organisations. Strengths and limitations: Large cohorts covering many possible triggers for neuropathic painMulti-disciplinary approach to study the interaction of clinical, psychosocial and genetic risk factorsHigh comparability of the data across centres thanks to harmonised protocolsOne limitation is that the length of the questionnaires might reduce the response rate and quality of responses of participants.

DOLORisk: study protocol for a multi-centre observational study to understand the risk factors and determinants of neuropathic pain

Background: Neuropathic pain is an increasingly prevalent condition and has a major impact on health and quality of life. However, the risk factors for the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain are poorly understood. Clinical, genetic and psychosocial factors all contribute to chronic pain, but their interactions have not been studied in large cohorts. The DOLORisk study aims to study these factors.

Protocol: Multicentre cross-sectional and longitudinal cohorts covering the main causes leading to neuropathic pain (e.g. diabetes, surgery, chemotherapy, traumatic injury), as well as rare conditions, follow a common protocol for phenotyping of the participants. This core protocol correlates answers given by the participants on a set of questionnaires with the results of their genetic analyses. A smaller number of participants undergo deeper phenotyping procedures, including neurological examination, nerve conduction studies, threshold tracking, quantitative sensory testing, conditioned pain modulation and electroencephalography.

Ethics and dissemination: All studies have been approved by their regional ethics committees as required by national law. Results are disseminated through the DOLORisk website, scientific meetings, open-access publications, and in partnership with patient organisations.

Strengths and limitations:

Large cohorts covering many possible triggers for neuropathic pain

Multi-disciplinary approach to study the interaction of clinical, psychosocial and genetic risk factors

High comparability of the data across centres thanks to harmonised protocols

One limitation is that the length of the questionnaires might reduce the response rate and quality of responses of participants

The IASP classification of chronic pain for ICD-11: chronic neuropathic pain

The upcoming 11th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) of the World Health Organization (WHO) offers a unique opportunity to improve the representation of painful disorders. For this purpose, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) has convened an interdisciplinary task force of pain specialists. Here, we present the case for a reclassification of nervous system lesions or diseases associated with persistent or recurrent pain for ≥3 months. The new classification lists the most common conditions of peripheral neuropathic pain: trigeminal neuralgia, peripheral nerve injury, painful polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, and painful radiculopathy. Conditions of central neuropathic pain include pain caused by spinal cord or brain injury, poststroke pain, and pain associated with multiple sclerosis. Diseases not explicitly mentioned in the classification are captured in residual categories of ICD-11. Conditions of chronic neuropathic pain are either insufficiently defined or missing in the current version of the ICD, despite their prevalence and clinical importance. We provide the short definitions of diagnostic entities for which we submitted more detailed content models to the WHO. Definitions and content models were established in collaboration with the Classification Committee of the IASP's Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group (NeuPSIG). Up to 10% of the general population experience neuropathic pain. The majority of these patients do not receive satisfactory relief with existing treatments. A precise classification of chronic neuropathic pain in ICD-11 is necessary to document this public health need and the therapeutic challenges related to chronic neuropathic pain.

The utility of a point-of-care sural nerve conduction device for detection of diabetic polyneuropathy: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Rapid and accessible methods for diagnosing diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) have been developed, but not validated, in large cohorts of people with diabetes.

METHODS

The performance of a point-of-care device (POCD) was studied in 168 patients with type 2 diabetes, estimating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) compared with conventional sural nerve conduction studies (NCS).

RESULTS

A POCD amplitude limit of 6 µV increased the sensitivity (96%) and NPV (98%), but decreased the specificity (71%) and PPV (54%) compared with the 4-µV limit, which had values of 78%, 92%, 89%, and 71%, respectively. POCD on both legs showed better performance than on 1 leg. POCD amplitudes and conduction velocities correlated significantly with conventional sural NCS, but POCD values were underestimated compared with NCS.

DISCUSSION

The POCD may be used as a suitable screening tool for detection of DPN. Patients with abnormal and borderline results should undergo conventional NCS. Muscle Nerve 59:187-193, 2019.

Chronic pain after bilateral thoracotomy in lung transplant patients

Background and aims

The relative contribution of patient-related factors and intraoperative nerve damage for the development of chronic pain after surgery is unclear. This study aimed to examine chronic pain after bilateral thoracotomy. We hypothesized, that individual patient-related risk factors would be important resulting in an intraindividual uniformity of pain and hyperphenomena between the two sides of the thorax.

Methods

Twenty patients who had undergone lung transplantation via bilateral thoracotomy 6–12 months previously were included from the Danish Lung Transplant program, Rigshospitalet, Denmark, from October 2016 to August 2017. All patients answered questionnaires about pain in and around the scar, completed the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, and underwent bedside examination for hyperphenomena (brush- and cold-evoked allodynia, pinprick hyperalgesia) and pinprick hypoalgesia.

Results

Nine patients reported spontaneous pain bilaterally, five patients had pain on one side only, and six patients had no pain. Hyperphenomena were present on both sides of the thorax in 13 patients, on one side in four patients, and three patients had no hyperphenomena. The intraindividual uniformity of pain (p=0.029) and hyperphenomena (p=0.011) between the two sides of the thorax suggests that patient-related factors play an important role in the development of chronic pain.

Conclusions

The results of the present study provide support for the hypothesis of an individual predisposition for the development of chronic pain after thoracotomy.

Implications

Patient-related risk factors contribute to the development of chronic pain after thoracotomy. This result most likely can be transferred to chronic pain after other surgical procedures and therefore help us understand risk factors for chronic pain after surgery.

Progression of Neuropathic Pain after Acute Spinal Cord Injury: A Meta-Analysis and Framework for Clinical Trials

The translation of therapeutic interventions to humans with spinal cord injury with the goal of promoting growth and repair in the central nervous system could, inadvertently, drive mechanisms associated with the development of neuropathic pain. A framework is needed to evaluate the probability that a therapeutic intervention for acute spinal cord injury modifies the progression of neuropathic pain. We analyzed a large, longitudinal dataset from the European Multi-Center Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) and compared these observations with a previously published Swedish/Danish cohort. A meta-analysis was performed to produce aggregate estimates for the transition period between 1-6 months and the transition period between 1-12 months after injury. A secondary analysis used logistic regression to explore associations between the progression of neuropathic pain and demographics, pain characteristics, and injury characteristics. For overall neuropathic pain, 72% presenting with pain symptoms at one month reported persisting symptoms at six months, and 23% who did not have neuropathic pain at one month later had it develop. From 1-12 months, there was a similar likelihood of pain persisting (69%) and slightly higher rate of pain developing (36%). Characteristics that were significantly associated with the progression of pain included age and sensory and motor preservation. We provide historical benchmarks for estimating the progression of neuropathic pain during the first year after acute SCI. This information will be useful for comparison and evaluating safety during early phase acute spinal cord injury trials.