Search

Abstract: Chronic low back pain can be caused by impaired control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles and consequent functional instability of the lumbar spine. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and prognosis is unfavorable. We conducted an international randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial at 26 multidisciplinary centers to determine safety and efficacy of an implantable, restorative neurostimulator designed to restore multifidus neuromuscular control and facilitate relief of symptoms (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02577354). Two hundred four eligible participants with refractory mechanical (musculoskeletal) chronic LBP and a positive prone instability test indicating impaired multifidus control were implanted and randomized to therapeutic (N = 102) or low-level sham (N = 102) stimulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus nerve (multifidus nerve supply) for 30 minutes twice daily. The primary endpoint was the comparison of responder proportions (≥30% relief on the LBP visual analogue scale without analgesics increase) at 120 days. After the primary endpoint assessment, participants in the sham-control group switched to therapeutic stimulation and the combined cohort was assessed through 1 year for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The primary endpoint was inconclusive in terms of treatment superiority (57.1% vs 46.6%; difference: 10.4%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3% to 24.1%, P = 0.138). Prespecified secondary outcomes and analyses were consistent with a modest but clinically meaningful treatment benefit at 120 days. Improvements from baseline, which continued to accrue in all outcome measures after conclusion of the double-blind phase, were clinically important at 1 year. The incidence of serious procedure- or device-related adverse events (3.9%) compared favorably with other neuromodulation therapies for chronic pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic pain is a significant health problem worldwide with limited pharmacological treatment options. This study evaluated the relative efficacy of 4 treatment sessions each of 4 nonpharmacological treatments: (1) hypnotic cognitive therapy (using hypnosis to alter the meaning of pain); (2) standard cognitive therapy; (3) hypnosis focused on pain reduction, and (4) pain education. One hundred seventy-three individuals with chronic pain were randomly assigned to receive 4 sessions of 1 of the 4 treatments. Primary (pain intensity) and secondary outcome measures were administered by assessors unaware of treatment allocation at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Treatment effects were evaluated using analysis of variance, a generalized estimating equation approach, or a Fisher exact test, depending on the outcome domain examined. All 4 treatments were associated with medium to large effect size improvements in pain intensity that maintained up to 12 months posttreatment. Pretreatment to posttreatment improvements were observed across the 4 treatment conditions on the secondary outcomes of pain interference and depressive symptoms, with some return towards pretreatment levels at 12-month follow-up. No significant between-group differences emerged in omnibus analyses, and few statistically significant between-group differences emerged in the planned pairwise analyses, although the 2 significant effects that did emerge favored hypnotic cognitive therapy. Future research is needed to determine whether the significant differences that emerged are reliable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This clinical trial evaluated the independent and combined effects of a tricyclic antidepressant (desipramine) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic back pain relative to an active placebo treatment. Participants (n = 142) were patients experiencing daily chronic back pain at an intensity of ≥4/10 who were randomized to a single-center, double-blind, 12-week, 4-arm, parallel groups controlled clinical trial of (1) low concentration desipramine titrated to reach a serum concentration level of 15 to 65 ng/mL; (2) CBT and active placebo medication (benztropine mesylate, 0.125 mg); (3) low concentration desipramine and CBT; and (4) active benztropine placebo medication. Participants completed the Differential Description Scale and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaires before and after treatment as validated measures of outcomes in back pain intensity and disability, respectively. Participants within each condition showed significant reductions from pre-treatment to post-treatment in pain intensity (mean changes ranged from = -2.58 to 3.87, Cohen's d's = 0.46-0.84) and improvements in pain disability (mean changes = -3.04 to 4.29, Cohen's d's = 0.54-0.88). However, intent-to-treat analyses at post-treatment showed no significant differences between any condition, with small effect sizes ranging from 0.06 to 0.27. The results from this clinical trial did not support the hypothesis that desipramine, CBT, or their combination would be statistically superior to an active medicine placebo for reducing chronic back pain intensity or disability. Key limitations included recruiting 71% of the planned sample size and use of multiple inclusion/exclusion criteria that may limit generalizability to broader populations of patients with chronic back pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attention bias for pain-related information is theorised to maintain chronic pain, indicating that changing this bias could improve pain-related outcomes. Modifying attention biases in adolescents, when chronic pain often first emerges, may be particularly beneficial. We report here a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial of attention bias modification (ABM) training in adolescents with chronic noncancer pain. Adolescent patients (N = 66) were randomly assigned to complete multiple sessions of dot-probe ABM training (N = 23), placebo training (N = 22), or no training (waitlist; N = 21) across a period of 4 weeks. Patients completed all assessments at a hospital-based pediatric pain clinic and completed all training at home. We examined the relative effects of ABM on attention bias and attention control, as well as pain symptomatology (primary outcome), pain catastrophizing, anxiety and depression symptoms, and functional disability (secondary outcomes) immediately after training and 3 months later. We found no evidence that ABM changed attention bias or attention control in comparison with placebo training or no training. We also found that pain and pain-related outcomes were no different for those undergoing ABM compared with placebo training or no training when tested immediately after training or 3 months later. Overall, we found no evidence to support the efficacy of dot-probe ABM for improving pain-related outcomes in adolescents with chronic pain. This study was registered on the NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio in August 2014 (UK Clinical Trials Gateway: CPMS 17251) and funded by a Research Training Fellowship awarded to Lauren Heathcote by Action Medical Research for Children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a common condition, usually with the involvement of nociceptive and neuropathic pain components, high economic burden and impact on quality of life. Cebranopadol is a potent, first-in-class drug candidate with a novel mechanistic approach, combining nociceptin/orphanin FQ peptide and opioid peptide receptor agonism. We conducted the first phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial, evaluating the analgesic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cebranopadol in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic LBP with and without neuropathic pain component. Patients were treated for 14 weeks with cebranopadol 200, 400, or 600 μg once daily, tapentadol 200 mg twice daily, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoints were the change from baseline pain to the weekly average 24-hour pain during the entire 12 weeks and during week 12 of the maintenance phase. Cebranopadol demonstrated analgesic efficacy, with statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements over placebo for all doses as did tapentadol. The responder analysis (≥30% or ≥50% pain reduction) confirmed these results. Cebranopadol and tapentadol displayed beneficial effects on sleep and functionality. Cebranopadol treatment was safe, with higher doses leading to higher treatment discontinuations because of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring mostly during titration. Those patients reaching the target doses had an acceptable tolerability profile. The incidence rate of most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events during maintenance phase was ≤10%. Although further optimizing the titration scheme to the optimal dose for individual patients is essential, cebranopadol is a new drug candidate with a novel mechanistic approach for potential chronic LBP treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For patients with chronic pain conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), who experience elevated levels of distress, tailored-guided internet-based cognitive-behavioral treatment may be effective in improving psychological and physical functioning, and reducing the impact of RA on daily life. A multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted for RA patients with elevated levels of distress as assessed by a disease-specific measure. The control group (n = 71) received standard care and the intervention group (n = 62) additionally received an internet-based tailored cognitive-behavioral intervention. Main analyses were performed using a linear mixed model estimating differences between the intervention and control groups in scores of psychological functioning, physical functioning, and impact of RA on daily life at preassesment and postassessment, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Patients who received the internet-based intervention reported a larger improvement in psychological functioning compared with the control group, indicating less depressed mood (P < 0.001, d = 0.54), negative mood (P = 0.01, d = 0.38), and anxiety (P < 0.001, d = 0.48) during the course of the 1-year follow-up period. Regarding physical functioning, a trend was found for the intervention group reporting less fatigue than the control group (P = 0.06, d = 0.24), whereas no effect was found on pain. No effects were found for the impact of RA on daily life, except for the intervention group experiencing fewer role limitations due to emotional problems (P < 0.001, d = 0.53). Offering guided internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy is a promising development to aid patients with psychological distress particularly in improving psychological functioning. Further research on adherence and specific intervention ingredients is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internet-delivered interventions are emerging as a strategy to address barriers to care for individuals with chronic pain. This is the first large multicenter randomized controlled trial of Internet-delivered cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for pediatric chronic pain. Participants included were 273 adolescents (205 females and 68 males), aged 11 to 17 years with mixed chronic pain conditions and their parents, who were randomly assigned in a parallel-group design to Internet-delivered CBT (n = 138) or Internet-delivered Education (n = 135). Assessments were completed before treatment, immediately after treatment, and at 6-month follow-up. All data collection and procedures took place online. The primary analysis used linear growth models. Results demonstrated significantly greater reduction on the primary outcome of activity limitations from baseline to 6-month follow-up for Internet CBT compared with Internet education (b = -1.13, P = 0.03). On secondary outcomes, significant beneficial effects of Internet CBT were found on sleep quality (b = 0.14, P = 0.04), on reducing parent miscarried helping (b = -2.66, P = 0.007) and protective behaviors (b = -0.19, P = 0.001), and on treatment satisfaction (P values < 0.05). On exploratory outcomes, benefits of Internet CBT were found for parent-perceived impact (ie, reductions in depression, anxiety, self-blame about their adolescent's pain, and improvement in parent behavioral responses to pain). In conclusion, our Internet-delivered CBT intervention produced a number of beneficial effects on adolescent and parent outcomes, and could ultimately lead to wide dissemination of evidence-based psychological pain treatment for youth and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opioid analgesics are commonly used for the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP); however, abuse potential is a major concern. This study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment randomized-withdrawal study design to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and analgesic efficacy of an abuse-deterrent formulation of extended-release oxycodone, Xtampza ER, in opioid-naive and opioid-experienced adults with moderate-to-severe CLBP. Patients entered an open-label titration phase (N = 740); those who were successfully titrated on Xtampza ER (≥40 to ≤160 mg oxycodone hydrochloride equivalent per day) were randomized to active drug (N = 193) or placebo (N = 196) for 12 weeks. Primary efficacy results showed a statistically significant difference in average pain intensity from randomization baseline to treatment week 12 between the Xtampza ER and placebo groups (mean [±SE], -1.56 [0.267]; P < 0.0001). All sensitivity analyses results supported the primary result of the study. Secondary efficacy outcomes indicated that Xtampza ER vs placebo had more patients with improvement in patient global impression of change (26.4% vs 14.3%; P < 0.0001), longer time-to-exit from the study (58 vs 35 days; P = 0.0102), and a greater proportion of patients with ≥30% (49.2% vs 33.2%; P = 0.0013) and ≥50% (38.3% vs 24.5%; P = 0.0032) improvement in pain intensity. There was less rescue medication (acetaminophen) use in the Xtampza ER treatment group than in the placebo group. Xtampza ER had an adverse event profile consistent with other opioids and was well tolerated; no new safety concerns were identified. In conclusion, Xtampza ER resulted in clinically and statistically significant efficacy in patients with CLBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]