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

Fibromyalgia pain management effectiveness from the patient perspective: a qualitative evidence synthesis

PURPOSE

This qualitative evidence synthesis aimed to identify and integrate findings where adults with fibromyalgia discussed how they managed their pain, and their perceptions of prescribed treatments from healthcare professionals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search strategy was implemented in PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Cinahl Plus databases. The GRADE-CERQual framework was used to evaluate the findings confidence. The findings were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

A total of 35 studies (N = 728) were included. The confidence in the findings ranged from high to low confidence. Patients with fibromyalgia often do not benefit from seeking medical attention due to provider stigma, and have varying views on medication effectiveness commonly reporting feeling like "walking chemists." They find mixed effects from exercise, and consider psychological support essential, although the benefits of cognitive-behavioral therapy were controversial. Combining cognitive-behavioral therapy with physical exercise appears more effective, while natural and complementary therapies have short-term benefits and high costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain management is a source for frustration and an unmet need for patients with fibromyalgia. The current findings provide crucial insight for providers and researchers; and support the need for fibromyalgia phenotyping and precision medicine approaches to pain management.Implications for RehabilitationChronic widespread pain is the defining feature of fibromyalgia, yet pain reduction is often an unmet need for these individuals.The lack of effective treatments resulting in long-term relief proves frustrating for patients and healthcare providers.Rehabilitation professional should consider the unique insight into this complex, heterogeneous condition that this qualitative synthesis provides to better understand their patient's perspective on pain management.Given the differing perspectives on pain treatment approaches individuals with fibromyalgia report, providers should discuss with each patient their current strategies and take a patient-centered, individualized approach to form an effective treatment plan.

Efficacy of pregabalin, amitriptyline, and gabapentin for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain largely influences the well-being of patients. Anticonvulsant and antidepressant medications, such as Pregabalin, Gabapentin, and Amitriptyline, are routinely prescribed as initial treatments for neuropathic pain. The study sample has a total of 270 patients who meet the inclusion criteria and are further distributed into three equally sized groups (A, B, and C). Group A was administered with Gabapentine 300mg, Group B with Pregabalin 75 mg, and Amitriptyline 10 mg to Group C. The occurrence of any adverse drug response was documented using the ADR reporting form, while the pain of the patient's post-medication was recorded using a numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). The comparison of the NPRS scores of all three groups "by using ANOVA test" both at baseline and after 15 days reveal that the differences between the three groups are statistically insignificant (p > 0.089). However, after one month of continuous use, the difference becomes slightly significant (I.e., p = 0.003). Gabapentin, pregabalin, and amitriptyline demonstrate similar effectiveness in alleviating neuropathic (NeP) pain. The study concludes that gabapentin is superior to both pregabalin and amitriptyline with fewer adverse effects, leading to improved patient adherence for long-term use.

UK healthcare services for people with fibromyalgia: results from two web-based national surveys (the PACFiND study)

Background

The UK’s “Getting It Right First Time” programme recommends that management of people with fibromyalgia should centre on primary care. However, it remains unclear as to how best to organise health systems to deliver services to optimise patient outcomes.

Aim

To profile UK healthcare services for people with fibromyalgia: provision of National Health Services (NHS) and use of non-NHS services by people with fibromyalgia.

Methods

Two online open surveys (A and B) incorporating questions about diagnosis, treatment and management of fibromyalgia and gaps in healthcare services were conducted between 11th September 2019 and 3rd February 2020. These were targeted to NHS healthcare professionals consulting with people with fibromyalgia (Survey A) and people ≥16 years diagnosed with fibromyalgia using non-NHS services to manage their condition (Survey B). Descriptive statistics were used to report quantitative data. Thematic analysis was undertaken for qualitative data.

Results

Survey A received 1701 responses from NHS healthcare professionals across the UK. Survey B received 549 responses from people with fibromyalgia. The results show that NHS services for people with fibromyalgia are highly disparate, with few professionals reporting care pathways in their localities. Diagnosing fibromyalgia is variable among NHS healthcare professionals and education and pharmacotherapy are mainstays of NHS treatment and management. The greatest perceived unmet need in healthcare for people with fibromyalgia is a lack of available services. From the pooled qualitative data, three themes were developed: ‘a troublesome label’, ‘a heavy burden’ and ‘a low priority’. Through the concept of candidacy, these themes provide insight into limited access to healthcare for people with fibromyalgia in the UK.

Conclusion

This study highlights problems across the NHS in service provision and access for people with fibromyalgia, including several issues less commonly discussed; potential bias towards people with self-diagnosed fibromyalgia, challenges facing general practitioners seeking involvement of secondary care services for people with fibromyalgia, and a lack of mental health and multidisciplinary holistic services to support those affected. The need for new models of primary and community care that offer timely diagnosis, interventions to support self-management with access to specialist services if needed, is paramount.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08324-4.

Depression: A Modifiable Risk Factor for Poor Outcomes in Fibromyalgia

Background:

About 4 out of 10 fibromyalgia patients suffer from depression. The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) guidelines recommend using antidepressants to treat fibromyalgia.

Objective:

To determine predictors of improved outcomes following a multicomponent treatment program.

Design:

We designed this longitudinal treatment outcome study to evaluate the prevalence of depression symptoms in patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia at a tertiary care facility, and the impact of depression on functional outcomes after completing a multicomponent fibromyalgia treatment program.

Setting:

Tertiary care center.

Patients:

This study included 411 adult patients with fibromyalgia who completed a multicomponent treatment program for fibromyalgia. Expert physicians performed comprehensive evaluations following American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria to confirm fibromyalgia before referral to the program.

Intervention:

An intensive outpatient multicomponent treatment program consisting of 16 hours of cognitive behavioral strategies served as the intervention.

Measurements:

Functional status was assessed using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Revised (FIQR). Depression was evaluated with the Center for Epidemiologic Study of Depression (CES-D) measure. Measures were administered prior to participation in the program and approximately 5 months following completion of the program.

Results:

The cohort had a high prevalence of depressive symptoms (73.2% had depression at admission). Higher depression scores at baseline predicted poorer outcomes following multi-component treatment. Effectively treated depression resulted in improved functioning at follow-up.

Limitations:

Findings limited to tertiary care center cohort of fibromyalgia patients. Patients did not undergo a structured clinical diagnostic interview to diagnose depression.

Conclusions:

The current data links depression to poorer outcomes in patients with fibromyalgia. Depression is an important modifiable factor in the management of fibromyalgia. Guidelines should reflect the importance of assessing and effectively treating depression at the time of diagnosis of fibromyalgia, to improve functional outcomes.

Registration:

Specific registry and specific study registration number—Institutional Review Board—(IRB# 19-000495).

Funding Source:

No funding.

Idiopathic myalgic pain (fibromyalgia): supportive management and prevention with Pycnogenol®

BACKGROUND

The aim of this registry study was the prospective evaluation of the efficacy of Pycnogenol^® in idiopathic fibromyalgia (FM), over 4 weeks in comparison with the standard management (SM).

METHODS

A SM and a Pycnogenol^®+SM group were formed. Pycnogenol^® supplementation was used at the dose of 150 mg/day (4 weeks). The study considered the most important/frequent symptoms of FM.

RESULTS

Fifty patients with idiopathic fibromyalgia were included: 26 in the Pycnogenol^® group and 24 served as controls. The two groups were comparable at inclusion. No other disease or condition was present. All subjects were otherwise healthy women (BMI<26), not using any drug. All subjects had an elevated level of oxidative stress (OS) at inclusion. All routine blood tests - and all inflammatory and rheumatic tests - were within the normal range at inclusion and at the end of the study. No safety or tolerability problems were observed. The percentage of patients using NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) as rescue medications in the observation period was significantly higher in the SM management group (P<0.05) in comparison with the supplement group. The percentage of patients using corticosteroids as rescue medication was significantly higher in the SM group (P<0.05). The percentage of subjects with the symptoms/complaints decreased significantly, considering each symptom, with Pycnogenol^® after 4 weeks in comparison with the SM (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Pycnogenol^® supplementation appears to control and reduce the intensity of common symptoms and complaints - especially pain-related - associated with FM. Pycnogenol^® could be a 'soft', safe supplementation and prevention method to manage the symptoms of most of these patients, even for longer periods, reducing the need for drugs.

Suicidal Ideation Profiles in Patients with Fibromyalgia Using Transdiagnostic Psychological and Fibromyalgia-Associated Variables

Several studies have emphasized the heterogeneity of fibromyalgia patients. Furthermore, fibromyalgia patients are considered a high-risk suicide group. The ideation-to-action framework proposes a set of transdiagnostic psychological factors involved in the development of suicidal ideation. The present study aims to explore the existence of different subgroups according to their vulnerability to suicidal ideation through these transdiagnostic psychological variables and a set of variables typically associated with fibromyalgia. In this cross-sectional study, 151 fibromyalgia patients were assessed through the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, Beck Depression Inventory-II, Plutchik Suicide Risk Scale, Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire, Defeat Scale, Entrapment Scale, Psychache Scale, and Beck Hopelessness Scale. A K-means cluster analysis identified two clusters, one (45.70%) according to a low vulnerability, and a second (54.30%) with a high vulnerability to suicidal ideation. These clusters showed statistically significant differences in suicidal ideation and suicide risk. However, no differences were observed in most socio-demographic variables. In conclusion, fibromyalgia patients who present a clinical condition characterized by a moderate-high degree of physical dysfunction, overall disease impact and intensity of fibromyalgia-associated symptoms, along with a high degree of perceived burdensomeness, thwarted belongingness, defeat, entrapment, psychological pain and hopelessness, form a homogeneous group at high risk for suicidal ideation.

Prescription Pattern of Drugs Used for Neuropathic Pain and Adherence to NeuPSIG Guidelines in Cancer

Objective

The objective of the present research was to evaluate the prescription pattern of the drugs used in the pharmacological treatment of cancer-related neuropathic pain (CRNP) and to assess the adherence of the physicians to the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group (NeuPSIG) Guidelines.

Materials and Methods

This was a cross-sectional, observational study where patients who presented to the pain and palliative care outpatient clinic of the tertiary care hospital with CRNP were prospectively recruited. Participants were screened for neuropathic pain using DN4 questionnaire. Demographic details, diagnosis, medication details, and adherence to NeuPSIG guidelines were assessed using a validated questionnaire.

Results

Of 300 patients screened, 64% were male and 36% were female, with a mean age of 48.26 ± 13.05 years. The predominant symptoms found were pin-and-needle sensation (99%) followed by tingling sensation (98.66%). The most common diagnosis was head-and-neck cancers (37.3%) followed by bone cancers (17.3%) and lung cancers (15.3%). Among the first-line drugs recommended in NeuPSIG for CRNP, pregabalin (78.7%) was the most common drug prescribed followed by amitriptyline (67%). The most common co-prescribed drugs were acid suppressants drugs (50.7%). Tapentadol, which is not part of the NeuPSIG guidelines, was prescribed on 51 occasions for neuropathic pain. Underdosing was observed in 272 prescriptions. Only 12 prescriptions completely adhered, while 275 had partial, and 13 prescriptions had poor adherence to NeuPSIG guidelines.

Conclusion

The most commonly used drugs in the treatment of CRNP were pregabalin and amitriptyline. Most physician partially or did not adhere to the NeuPSIG guideline in the management of CRNP.

Insomnia Increases Symptom Severity and Health Care Utilization in Patients With Fibromyalgia: A Population-based Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objective:

This study aimed to determine whether comorbid insomnia is associated with increased use of fibromyalgia-related medications and health resources in fibromyalgia (FM) patients.

Materials and Methods:

We analyzed data retrieved from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2010, which contains claims data of 1 million beneficiaries randomly selected from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance program. Patients treated for FM (n=17,920) on 2 separate visits between 2000 and 2001 were selected and subsequently divided into 2 groups: patients with and without comorbid insomnia (n=5466 and 12,454, respectively). Insomnia was identified through diagnosis on 2 separate visits after the index FM date. FM-related pharmacotherapies and ambulatory care visits were tracked from the index date to the end of 2013.

Results:

Insomnia was associated with increased likelihood of future use of antidepressants (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=3.84, P<0.001), gabapentin (adjusted OR=1.67, P<0.001), pregabalin (adjusted OR=1.79, P=0.046), muscle relaxants (adjusted OR=3.05, P<0.001), and opioids and tramadol (adjusted OR=1.59, P<0.001) among FM patients compared with FM patients without insomnia. In addition, a diagnosis of insomnia was associated with an increased frequency of visits to ambulatory care services for both FM (β=1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.57-2.02; P<0.001) and other conditions (β=108.51; 95% confidence interval, 103.14-113.89; P<0.001).

Discussion:

This study demonstrates the substantial burden of comorbid insomnia in patients with FM.

Opioid Prescribing and Polypharmacy in Children with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

OBJECTIVE

Thirty percent of adults with fibromyalgia receive an opioid, but the prevalence of opioid prescribing in pediatric chronic musculoskeletal pain is unknown. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of and factors associated with opioid exposure and polypharmacy among children with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study using health care claims data from 2000 to 2013, the index date was the first ICD-9 code 729.1. Included subjects were ≥ 2 and < 18 years old at the index date with two or more codes within 12 months and 18 months of continuous enrollment. Subjects with burns, sickle cell disease, or malignancy were excluded. Opioid exposure was defined as one or more prescriptions within six months before or any time after the index date. Polypharmacy was considered minor (2-4 medications) or major (≥5 medications).

RESULTS

Of 25,321 included subjects, 20% received an opioid and 26% experienced minor polypharmacy. Opioid exposure was associated with female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, P < 0.01), Caucasian race (OR = 1.27, P < 0.01), hospitalization (OR = 1.20, P < 0.01), and visit with anesthesiology (OR = 1.97, P < 0.01) or orthopedics (OR = 1.09, P < 0.05). Mental health codes were associated with decreased odds of opioid exposure (all P < 0.05). Children seen by a chiropractor or physiatrist had a reduced odds of receipt of an opioid (OR = 0.42 and 0.84, respectively, both P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty percent of children with chronic musculoskeletal pain received an opioid. Twenty-six percent experienced polypharmacy, with the majority receiving 2-4 medications. Increased availability of psychological and nonpharmacologic services are potential strategies to reduce opioid exposure.

Facts and myths pertaining to fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterized by chronic widespread pain, unrefreshing sleep, physical exhaustion, and cognitive difficulties. It occurs in all populations throughout the world, with prevalence between 2% and 4% in general populations. Definition, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of FM remain points of contention, with some even contesting its existence. The various classification systems according to pain medicine, psychiatry, and neurology (pain disease; persistent somatoform pain disorder; masked depression; somatic symptom disorder; small fiber neuropathy; brain disease) mostly capture only some components of this complex and heterogeneous disorder. The diagnosis can be established in most cases by a general practitioner when the symptoms meet recognized criteria and a somatic disease sufficiently explaining the symptoms is excluded. Evidence-based interdisciplinary guidelines give a strong recommendation for aerobic exercise and cognitive behavioral therapies. Drug therapy is not mandatory. Only a minority of patients experience substantial symptom relief with duloxetine, milnacipran, and pregabalin.

Milnacipran poorly modulates pain in patients suffering from fibromyalgia: a randomized double-blind controlled study

Introduction

Fibromyalgia is characterized by widespread and chronic pain, and its prevalence is increasing worldwide. Milnacipran, an antidepressant, is often prescribed for fibromyalgia with a possible beneficial effect on central pain modulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate if milnacipran could modify the status of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) in patients suffering from fibromyalgia.

Design and setting

Randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

Subjects and methods

Women with fibromyalgia received milnacipran 100 mg or placebo. The primary end point was the evolution of CPM with treatments after a 30-second painful stimulus. Secondary outcomes included the predictability of milnacipran efficacy from CPM performance, evolution of global pain, mechanical sensitivity, thermal pain threshold, mechanical allodynia, cognitive function, and tolerance.

Results

Fifty-four women with fibromyalgia (46.7±10.6 years) were included and randomized, and 24 patients were analyzed in each group. At inclusion, CPM was dysfunctional (CPM₃₀=-0.5±1.9), and global pain was 6.5±1.8. After treatment, there was a nonsignificant CPM difference between milnacipran and placebo (CPM₃₀=-0.46±1.22 vs -0.69±1.43, respectively, p=0.55) and 18.8% vs 6.3% (p=0.085) patients did reactivate CPM after milnacipran vs placebo. Initial CPM was not a predictor of milnacipran efficacy. Global pain, mechanical and thermal thresholds, allodynia, cognition, and tolerance were not significantly different between both groups.

Conclusion

Milnacipran did not display a significant analgesic effect after 1-month treatment, but the tendency of milnacipran to reactivate CPM in a number of patients must be explored with longer treatment duration in future studies and pleads for possible subtypes of fibromyalgia patients.

Pregabalin Prescription for Neuropathic Pain and Fibromyalgia: A Descriptive Study Using Administrative Database in Japan

Objective

To assess dose, characteristics, and coprescribed analgesics in patients newly prescribed pregabalin for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in Japan.

Methods

Based on the medical and prescription information present in the Medical Data Vision database, we analyzed the initial and maximum daily doses, prescription period, coprescribed analgesics, and neuropathic pain-related disorders of patients newly prescribed pregabalin between 01 July 2010 and 31 December 2013.

Results

A total of 45,331 patients (mean age 66.8 years, 48.7% men) were newly prescribed pregabalin during this period. The mean initial and maximum daily doses were 97.3 mg and 127.8 mg, respectively, and decreased yearly. The duration of the prescription period was 111.9 (mean) and 53 (median) days, and the frequently coprescribed analgesics included NSAIDs, opioids, and Neurotropin®. About one half of the patients had spinal disorders.

Conclusion

In Japan during the period examined, the number of newly prescribed pregabalin users increased, but the initial and maximum daily doses decreased yearly after pregabalin went on the market. The maximum daily dose in Japan was lower than those reported in the USA and Europe. These differences might be associated with patient age and physical status and with anxiety about possible adverse events.

Facts and myths pertaining to fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterized by chronic widespread pain, unrefreshing sleep, physical exhaustion, and cognitive difficulties. It occurs in all populations throughout the world, with prevalence between 2% and 4% in general populations. Definition, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of FM remain points of contention, with some even contesting its existence. The various classification systems according to pain medicine, psychiatry, and neurology (pain disease; persistent somatoform pain disorder; masked depression; somatic symptom disorder; small fiber neuropathy; brain disease) mostly capture only some components of this complex and heterogeneous disorder. The diagnosis can be established in most cases by a general practitioner when the symptoms meet recognized criteria and a somatic disease sufficiently explaining the symptoms is excluded. Evidence-based interdisciplinary guidelines give a strong recommendation for aerobic exercise and cognitive behavioral therapies. Drug therapy is not mandatory. Only a minority of patients experience substantial symptom relief with duloxetine, milnacipran, and pregabalin.

Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.

Combination pharmacotherapy for the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is a chronic widespread pain condition affecting millions of people worldwide. Current pharmacotherapies are often ineffective and poorly tolerated. Combining different agents could provide superior pain relief and possibly also fewer side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of combination pharmacotherapy compared to monotherapy or placebo, or both, for the treatment of fibromyalgia pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to September 2017. We also searched reference lists of other reviews and trials registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomised controlled trials comparing combinations of two or more drugs to placebo or other comparators, or both, for the treatment of fibromyalgia pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

From all studies, we extracted data on: participant-reported pain relief of 30% or 50% or greater; patient global impression of clinical change (PGIC) much or very much improved or very much improved; any other pain-related outcome of improvement; withdrawals (lack of efficacy, adverse events), participants experiencing any adverse event, serious adverse events, and specific adverse events (e.g. somnolence and dizziness). The primary comparison was between combination and one or all single-agent comparators. We also assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 16 studies with 1474 participants. Three studies combined a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with a benzodiazepine (306 participants); two combined amitriptyline with fluoxetine (89 participants); two combined amitriptyline with a different agent (92 participants); two combined melatonin with an antidepressant (164 participants); one combined carisoprodol, paracetamol (acetaminophen), and caffeine (58 participants); one combined tramadol and paracetamol (acetaminophen) (315 participants); one combined malic acid and magnesium (24 participants); one combined a monoamine oxidase inhibitor with 5-hydroxytryptophan (200 participants); and one combined pregabalin with duloxetine (41 participants). Six studies compared the combination of multiple agents with each component alone and with inactive placebo; three studies compared combination pharmacotherapy with each individual component but did not include an inactive placebo group; two studies compared the combination of two agents with only one of the agents alone; and three studies compared the combination of two or more agents only with inactive placebo.Heterogeneity among studies in terms of class of agents evaluated, specific combinations used, outcomes reported, and doses given prevented any meta-analysis. None of the combinations of drugs found provided sufficient data for analysis compared with placebo or other comparators for our preferred outcomes. We therefore provide a narrative description of results. There was no or inadequate evidence in any comparison for primary and secondary outcomes. Two studies only reported any primary outcomes of interest (patient-reported pain relief of 30%, or 50%, or greater). For each 'Risk of bias' item, only half or fewer of studies had unequivocal low risk of bias. Small size and selective reporting were common as high risk of bias.Our GRADE assessment was therefore very low for primary outcomes of pain relief of 30% or 50% or greater, PGIC much or very much improved or very much improved, any pain-related outcome, participants experiencing any adverse event, any serious adverse event, or withdrawing because of an adverse event.Three studies found some evidence that combination pharmacotherapy reduced pain compared to monotherapy; these trials tested three different combinations: melatonin and amitriptyline, fluoxetine and amitriptyline, and pregabalin and duloxetine. Adverse events experienced by participants were not serious, and where they were reported (in 12 out of 16 studies), all participants experienced them, regardless of treatment. Common adverse events were nausea, dizziness, somnolence, and headache.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are few, large, high-quality trials comparing combination pharmacotherapy with monotherapy for fibromyalgia, consequently limiting evidence to support or refute the use of combination pharmacotherapy for fibromyalgia.

Healthcare Costs and Medication Adherence Among Patients with Fibromyalgia: Combination Medication vs. Duloxetine, Milnacipran, Venlafaxine, and Pregabalin Initiators

OBJECTIVE

To examine medication adherence and healthcare costs for combination prescription initiators (duloxetine/milnacipran/venlafaxine with pregabalin) vs. monotherapy initiators (duloxetine, milnacipran, venlafaxine, and pregabalin) among patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS).

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study used claims data for the South Carolina Blue Cross Blue Shield State Health Plan (SHP). Patients with FMS ≥ 18 years of age, with prescription initiation from July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2010, and SHP enrollment for 12 months pre- and post-index periods were included (combination: n = 100; pregabalin: n = 665; duloxetine: n = 713; milnacipran: n = 131; venlafaxine: n = 272). Medication adherence measures included high adherence (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%) and total supply days. Healthcare costs comprised direct medical expenditures. Propensity score methods of inverse probability of treatment weights were used to control for selection bias due to differing pre-index characteristics.

RESULTS

Odds ratios for high adherence were significantly increased (P < 0.05) among the combination cohort vs. the venlafaxine (2.15), duloxetine (1.39), and pregabalin (2.20) cohorts. Rate ratios for total supply days were significantly higher (P < 0.05) for combination vs. venlafaxine (1.23), duloxetine (1.08), and pregabalin (1.32) cohorts. Expenditures for total health care were significantly higher (P < 0.05) for combination vs. duloxetine ($26,291 vs. $17,190), milnacipran ($33,638 vs. $22,886), and venlafaxine ($26,586 vs. $16,857) cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication adherence was considerably better for combination prescription initiators; however, expenditures for total health care were higher. Still, our findings suggest important clinical benefits with the use of combination prescription therapy, and prospective studies of medication adherence are warranted to examine causal relationships with outcomes not captured by healthcare claims databases.

An update on emerging drugs for fibromyalgia treatment

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic disorder whose symptoms of pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances and depression have a devastating effect on patients' lives as it limits their ability to engage in everyday working and social activities, and make it difficult to maintain normal relationships with family, friends and employers. None of the currently available drugs are fully effective against the whole spectrum of symptoms. The aim of this narrative review is to summarise the data relating to the new therapeutic options that have become available over the last few years. Areas covered: Increasing efforts by the pharmaceutical industry have led to the introduction of new investigational drugs and new formulations of older drugs, and studies have been carried out in order to investigate the possibility of using drugs that are currently used for other diseases. Expert opinion: Slight improvements in the health of FM patients treated with drugs targeting a range of molecular mechanisms have been observed, but there is still no single drug that is capable of offering substantial efficacy against all of the characteristic symptoms of FM. The identification of new and improved therapies for FM requires consideration of the heterogeneity of the condition, which suggests the existence of different patient subgroups, a relationship between central and peripheral aspects of the pathophysiology, and the need for combined treatment with drugs targeting multiple molecular mechanisms.

Interpreting the Effectiveness of Opioids and Pregabalin for Pain Severity, Pain Interference, and Fatigue in Fibromyalgia Patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of opioids and/or pregabalin on patient-reported outcomes among fibromyalgia (FM) patients based on levels of improvement.

METHODS

A total of 1,421 FM patients were identified, with 3,082 observational periods of opioids with or without pregabalin use between April 2008 and February 2015. Patients were categorized by opioids, and pregabalin with and without opioids; opioids were designated by morphine equivalent dose (MED) of ≤ 20 (low MED), > 20 to < 100 (moderate MED), ≥ 100 (high MED), and pregabalin doses of ≤ 150 mg, 151 to 300 mg, and 301 to 450 mg. Proportions of patients meeting clinically relevant thresholds of ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% improvement for pain interference (ability to enjoy life; activity; mood; relationships; sleep), pain severity, and fatigue were compared among treatments, and area under the curve (AUC) for improvement and worsening of effects was determined, enabling ranking of treatments. Further analysis compared pregabalin doses.

RESULTS

Pregabalin without opioids resulted in the highest proportions of patients with ≥ 30% improvement on all pain items and pain interference with "ability to enjoy life," "activity" "mood," and "sleep." For the ≥ 50% threshold, pregabalin alone was highest for all pain interference items and for "average pain" and "worst pain." Pregabalin was consistently lowest across thresholds for fatigue, but showed better results combined with moderate MED opioids. Pregabalin doses recommended for treatment of FM (151 to 450 mg) generally resulted in the highest proportion of patients achieving thresholds relative to opioids. The AUC results were consistent with thresholds; pregabalin without opioids resulted in the greatest benefits with regard to improvement, with the highest ranking for overall improvement and overall effects.

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin without opioids provided the most favorable outcomes overall based on ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% improvement thresholds and AUC, with support for moderate MED opioids + pregabalin in patients suffering from fatigue. While most patients took less than recommended pregabalin doses, higher doses may lead to improved outcomes.

Low doses of amitriptyline, pregabalin, and gabapentin are preferred for management of neuropathic pain in India: is there a need for revisiting dosing recommendations?

Background

Current therapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain is often unsatisfactory. Considerable variation in treatment pattern still exists in spite of availability of sufficient literature from various guidelines. Recent Indian market data suggested that the utilization (sale) of drugs such as amitriptyline, pregabalin, and gabapentin was more for low-dose unit packs than that of the high-dose unit packs, raising the belief that these drugs are prescribed at a lower dose than is actually recommended in the guidelines. To test this hypothesis, a survey was conducted across speciality throughout the country to observe the prescription pattern of these drugs amongst the health care providers in India.

Methods

Three hundred fifty survey forms were distributed of which 281 forms were included for analysis.

Results

It was observed that the commonly used initiation and maintenance dose for amitriptyline, pregabalin, and gabapentin was 5–10 mg/day, 50–75 mg/day, and 100–300 mg/day, respectively. The reason to select the lower dosages was to have a balancing effect to achieve good efficacy with minimum side effects. Care-givers reported no side effects/not many side effects as a reason in 22.2%, 16.88%, and 23.86% patients with amitriptyline, pregabalin, and gabapentin, respectively. Sedation and giddiness were commonly reported with all three drugs.

Conclusions

Commonly prescribed drugs for management of neuropathic pain, such as amitriptyline, pregabalin, and gabapentin are preferred at lower doses in Indian clinical settings. Acceptable efficacy and low tolerance to the standard dosage is believed to be the reason behind the prescribed dose.

Challenges of implementing fibromyalgia treatment guidelines in current clinical practice

The current diagnostic and treatment pathway for patients with fibromyalgia (FM) is lengthy, complex, and characterized by multiple physician visits with an average 2-year wait until diagnosis. It is clear that effective identification and appropriate treatment of FM remain a challenge in current clinical practice. Ideally, FM management involves a multidisciplinary approach with the preferable patient pathway originating in primary care but supported by a range of health care providers, including referral to specialist care when necessary. After the publication of individual clinical studies, high-quality reviews, and meta-analyses, recently published FM treatment guidelines have transitioned from an expert consensus to an evidence-based approach. Evidence-based guidelines provide a framework for ensuring early diagnosis and timely adoption of appropriate treatment. However, for successful outcomes, FM treatments must adopt a more holistic approach, which addresses more than just pain. Impact on the associated symptoms of fatigue and cognitive problems, sleep and mood disturbances, and lowered functional status are also important in judging the success of FM therapy. Recently published guidelines recommend the adoption of a symptom-based approach to guide pharmacologic treatment. Emerging treatment options for FM may be best differentiated on the basis of their effect on comorbid symptoms that are often associated with pain (e.g. sleep disturbance, mood, fatigue). The current review discusses the most recently published Canadian guidelines and the implications of the recent European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations, with a focus on the challenges of implementing these guidelines in current clinical practice.