Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm type affects its sensitivity as a biomarker of fibromyalgia.

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a widespread chronic pain syndrome, possibly associated with the presence of central dysfunction in descending pain inhibition pathways. Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) has been proposed as a biomarker of FM. Nonetheless, the wide variety of methods used to measure CPM has hampered robust conclusions being reached. To clarify the validity of CPM as a biomarker of FM, we tested two CPM paradigms (parallel and sequential) in a sample of 23 female patients and 23 healthy women by applying test (mechanical) stimuli and conditioning (pressure cuff) stimuli. We evaluated whether CPM indices could correctly classify patients and controls, and we also determined the correlations between the indices and clinical variables such as symptomatology, disease impact, depression, quality of life, pain intensity, pain interference, fatigue and numbness. In addition, we compared the clinical status of CPM responders (efficient pain inhibitory mechanism) and non-responders. We observed that only parallel CPM testing correctly classified about 70% of patients with FM. In addition, more than 80% of healthy participants were found to be responders, while the rate was about 50% in the FM patients. The sequential CPM test was not as sensitive, with a decrease of up to 40% in the response rate for both groups. On the other hand, we did not observe any correlation between CPM measures and clinical symptoms. In summary, our findings demonstrate the influence of the CPM paradigm used and confirm that CPM may be a useful marker to complement FM diagnosis. However, the findings also cast doubts on the sensitivity of CPM as a marker of pain severity in FM.

Active and sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improved quality of life in female patients with fibromyalgia.

PURPOSE: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic pain syndrome with a strong impact on quality of life (QoL). Treatment of this condition remains a challenge, due to the scarce evidence for the effectiveness of the therapeutic approaches available. Current attention is focused on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which has yielded promising results for pain treatment. Rather than focusing only on pain relief, in this study, we aimed to determine how active or sham tDCS (over three cortical targets -the primary motor cortex, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the operculo-insular cortex-) affect QoL in patients with FM. METHODS: Using a double-blind, placebo-controlled design, we applied fifteen tDCS sessions of 20' to initial 130 participants (randomized to any of the four treatment groups). We evaluated the QoL (assessed by SF-36) and the symptoms' impact (assessed by FIQ-R) in baseline, after treatment and at 6 months follow-up. RESULTS: All groups were comparable as regards age, medication pattern and severity of symptoms before the treatment. We found that QoL and symptoms' impact improved in all treatment groups (including the sham) and this improvement lasted for up to 6 months. However, we did not observe any group effect nor group*treatment interaction. CONCLUSIONS: After the intervention, we observed a non-specific effect that may be due to placebo, favoured by the expectations of tDCS efficacy and psychosocial variables inherent to the intervention (daily relationship with therapists and other patients in the clinic). Therefore, active tDCS is not superior to sham stimulation in improving QoL in FM.