Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.

Background: Chronic pain is common and costly. Antidepressants are prescribed to reduce pain. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions, so effectiveness and safety for most antidepressants for pain conditions remain unknown. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for chronic pain (except headache) in adults. Our primary outcomes were as follows: substantial pain relief (50%), pain intensity, mood and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were as follows: moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, serious adverse events and withdrawal. Design: This was a systematic review with a network meta-analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases for randomised controlled trials of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions up until 4 January 2022. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020171855), and the protocol was published in the Cochrane Library (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014682). Setting: We analysed trials from all settings. Participants: We included trials in which participants had chronic pain, defined as longer than 3 months, from any condition excluding headache. Interventions: We included all antidepressants. Main outcome measures: Our primary outcome was substantial pain relief, defined as a reduction ˃ 50%. We also measured pain intensity, mood and adverse events. Secondary measures included moderate pain relief (above 30% reduction), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Global Impression of Change, serious adverse events, and withdrawal from trial. Results: We identified 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. Most studies were placebo-controlled (n = 83) and parallel armed (n = 141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies), neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of randomised controlled trials was 10 weeks. Most studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. Standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that for duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain. Limitations: The evidence for antidepressants other than duloxetine is poor. For duloxetine, it is not clear whether the effect applies to groups with both pain and low mood, since these groups were excluded from trials. There is also insufficient evidence on long-term outcomes and on adverse effects. Conclusions: There is only reliable evidence for duloxetine in the treatment of chronic pain. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Data for all other antidepressants were of low certainty. However, the findings should not be read as an encouragement to prescribe antidepressants where other non-pharmacological intervention could be equally effective, especially in the absence of good evidence on side effects and safety. Future work: There is a need for large, methodologically sound trials testing the effectiveness of antidepressants for chronic pain. These trials should examine long-term outcomes (> 6 months) and include people with low mood. There should also be better reporting of adverse events, tolerance of drugs, and long-term compliance. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020171855. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128782) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 62. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic pain is pain that lasts for more than 3 months. Over one-third of people across the world experience chronic pain. This often has a detrimental impact on people's mood, disability and well-being. Antidepressants are often prescribed to reduce pain, but we are not sure which antidepressants work best for different types of pain, or whether they are safe. We wanted to find out whether antidepressants were effective and safe for management of chronic pain. We searched for studies that had compared any antidepressant with any other treatment for any type of chronic pain (except headache). We compared all the treatments against each other using a statistical method called network meta-analysis. This method allows us to rank the treatments in order of best to worst for each outcome. We found 176 studies that included a total of 28,664 people with chronic pain. Most of the studies (83/176) compared an antidepressant with a placebo (which looks like the real medicine but does not have any medicine in it). The evidence from our analysis suggests that: Duloxetine is the antidepressant that we have the most confidence in. It was the best antidepressant for reducing pain and improving physical function. A standard dose of duloxetine was equally as effective for reducing pain as a high dose of duloxetine. Milnacipran was also effective at reducing pain, but we are not as confident in this result as in the one for duloxetine because there were fewer studies with fewer people involved. Aside from duloxetine and milnacipran, we do not have confidence in the results from any other antidepressant included in this review, and even for duloxetine and milnacipran, we do not know the long-term effects. It is important to recognise that the lack of evidence for the majority of antidepressants in this review does not necessarily equal a lack of benefit. Rather, this means that the large, high-quality trials required for us to be certain of an antidepressant's effectiveness have not been undertaken. Altogether, although duloxetine and milnacipran are effective, the results of this review should not be read as an encouragement to prescribe antidepressants where other non-pharmacological intervention could be equally effective, especially in the absence of good evidence on side effects and safety. These conclusions were informed by our patient and public involvement group.

Effect of Ritanserin and Duloxetine on the Gene Expression of Primary Aniridia and Healthy Human Limbal Stromal Cells, In Vitro.

INTRODUCTION: In congenital aniridia caused by mutations in paired box 6 (PAX6), PAX6 influences the migration and differentiation of limbal epithelial cells (LECs), thereby playing a pivotal role in aniridia-associated keratopathy. The antidepressants ritanserin and duloxetine affect PAX6 expression in LECs. Limbal stromal cells, which support limbal epithelial stem cells, are crucial in the limbal stem cell niche. This study explores how ritanserin and duloxetine influence gene expression in primary human limbal stromal cells from subjects with congenital aniridia and from healthy subjects, in vitro. METHODS: Primary human limbal stromal cells from corneas affected by aniridia (AN-LSCs) (n = 8) and from healthy corneas (LSCs) (n = 8) were isolated and cultured in either low-glucose serum-free (LGSF) or normal-glucose serum-containing (NGSC) media. Cells were treated with 4 µM ritanserin or duloxetine for 24 h. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) and western blot were used to assess the expression of PAX6, FOSL2, TGF-ß1, ACTA2A1, LUM, COL1A1, COL5A1, DSG1, FABP5 and ADH7. RESULTS: In AN-LSCs with LGSF-medium, ritanserin increased PAX6 messenger RNA (mRNA) (p = 0.007) and decreased TGF-ß1 and FOSL2 mRNA levels (P = 0.005, P = 0.038). In addition, TGF-ß1 protein levels decreased with both treatments (P = 0.02, P = 0.007), and FABP5 protein level increased, using ritanserin (P = 0.019). In LSCs with LGSF-medium, ACTA2A1 mRNA levels decreased using ritanserin and duloxetine (P = 0.028; P = 0.031), while FABP5 mRNA levels increased with ritanserin treatment (P = 0.003). Also, duloxetine use reduced α-SMA protein (P = 0.013) and increased FABP5 protein levels (P = 0.029). In LSCs with NGSC-medium, ritanserin elevated LUM, FABP5 and ADH7 mRNA and protein levels (P = 0.025, P = 0.003, P = 0.047, P = 0.024, P = 0.013, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study confirmed that the antipsychotropic drugs ritanserin and duloxetine alter PAX6 and TGF-ß1 gene expression in AN-LSCs cultured in LGSF-medium. These drugs were found to have an impact on retinoic acid signaling pathways and keratocyte characteristic markers both in LSCs and AN-LSCs, using different culture media.

Does postoperative low-dose duloxetine provide analgesic effect and lower morphine consumption after primary total knee arthroplasty? A prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Duloxetine as an adjunct analgesic has shown effective results in trials of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the regimen has not been standardized. We, therefore, evaluated the analgesic efficacy of low-dose duloxetine after TKA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing unilateral primary TKA, comparing 30 mg/d of duloxetine for 6 weeks as an additive medication for pain control to modern multimodal analgesia after TKA. The primary outcome measure was a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain at rest, during walking, and at night at 24 h, 72 h, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks after the operation. Secondary outcomes were morphine consumption, adverse events, and functional outcomes: Oxford Knee Score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). RESULTS: Mean VAS for pain at rest, during walking, and at night at 24 h, 72 h, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks showed no significant differences between the two groups, except a significantly lower mean VAS at night at 2 weeks in the duloxetine group. Mean total morphine consumption (0-72 h) was 33% less in the duloxetine group (6.8 ± 5.7 vs. 10.2 ± 7.3 mg, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events and functional outcomes except better KOOS symptoms at 6 and 12 weeks in the duloxetine group. CONCLUSION: Low-dose duloxetine could reduce postoperative morphine consumption and improve KOOS symptoms at 6 and 12 weeks with good tolerability. However, it did not significantly reduce pain at rest or during walking. Low-dose duloxetine can be considered an addition to contemporary multimodal pain management after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: Therapeutic Level I.

From common to unreported: a real-world study of adverse events to duloxetine in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: In a review of drug guidelines published by the International Association for the Study of Osteoarthritis, it is recommended to support the conditional use of duloxetine in patients with osteoarthritis. However, there is a lack of comprehensive research on the adverse events of duloxetine for the treatment of osteoarthritis populations. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the reporting odds ratio (ROR) to determine the strength of the adverse event signal. In addition, we investigated trends in the occurrence of adverse events using the Weibull shape parameter (WSP) test. RESULTS: The results showed that 50 and 14 adverse events were detected in both Asian and American populations. Four new adverse events, Mouth ulceration, femoral neck fracture, incontinence, long QT syndrome, were identified. There was a difference in the time of adverse event induction between the North American and Asian populations (p < 0.0001). The Weibull shape parameter (WSP) test showed that the incidence of AE decreased over time. CONCLUSION: Our study contributes to an in-depth understanding of the safety of duloxetine in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

New drug combination regimen based on pharmacokinetic characteristics-Erdafitinib combined with sertraline or duloxetine.

The aim of this study is to investigate novel strategies for reducing adverse reactions caused by erdafitinib through a drug combination based on its pharmacokinetic characteristics. The spectrum and characterizations of drugs that can inhibit the metabolism of erdafitinib are examined both in vitro and in vivo. The efficacy of combination regimens are then evaluated using subcutaneous xenograft tumor models. The results demonstrated that sertraline and duloxetine, out of more than 100 screened drugs, inhibited the metabolism of erdafitinib through mixed and non-competitive inhibition, respectively. This inhibition primarily occurred via the CYP2C9 and CYP2D6 pathways. The primary alleles of CYP2C9 and CYP2D6 not only determine the metabolic characteristics of erdafitinib but also influence the strength of drug-drug interactions. Co-administration of sertraline or duloxetine with erdafitinib in rats and mice resulted in nearly a three-fold increase in the blood exposure of erdafitinib and its major metabolite M6. When sertraline or duloxetine was combined with 1/3 of the erdafitinib dosage, the anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects on SNU-16 xenografts were comparable to those of the original full dose of erdafitinib. However, the combination regimen significantly mitigated hyperphosphatemia, retinal damage, intestinal villus damage, and gut microbiome dysbiosis. This study utilized pharmacokinetic methods to propose a new formulation of erdafitinib combined with sertraline or duloxetine. The findings suggest that this combination has potential for clinical co-administration based on a database analysis, thereby providing a novel strategy for anti-tumor treatment with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors.

Cost-utility analysis of duloxetine in osteoarthritis: from Chinese healthcare perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-utility of duloxetine compared with that of a placebo, common traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) from a Chinese healthcare perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed. The costs and utility inputs were obtained from the database and published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the main model outputs. Subgroup analyses were also conducted for patients at high risk of gastrointestinal (GI) or cardiovascular (CV) AEs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The model estimated an ICER of $3409.21/QALY for duloxetine compared with etoricoxib, with duloxetine dominating other active treatment strategies in patients at a low risk of GI and CV AEs. The ICER for duloxetine over etoricoxib was $322.21/QALY in patients at high risk of GI and CV AEs. These results were consistent with the sensitivity analyses; 53.64% and 53.93% of the patients were willing to use duloxetine comparing with etoricoxib, for which the thresholds were 1.0 and 3.0 per capita gross domestic product (GDP), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine is a valuable option for patients with OA; however, uncertainties exist in the model, and these suggestions can be adopted with caution.

Vortioxetine reduces the development of pain-related behaviour in a knee osteoarthritis model in rats: Involvement of nerve growth factor (NGF) down-regulation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Vortioxetine, a multimodal-acting antidepressant, has recently shown analgesic properties. We aimed to investigate its prophylactic effect in the osteoarthritis (OA) model and gain insights into the underlying molecular mechanisms. Duloxetine was studied as a reference. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: In the monoiodoacetate (MIA)-induced rat model of knee OA, pain-related behaviour was assessed in weight-bearing and Von Frey tests. Antidepressants were administered orally once daily for 28 days. Gene expression of pain-related mediators (Ngf, Il-1ß, Tnf-α, Bdnf, and Tac1 encoding substance P) and oxidative stress parameters were determined after completion of the treatment/behavioural testing protocol. KEY RESULTS: Vortioxetine and duloxetine dose dependently reduced weight-bearing asymmetry and mechanical hyperalgesia of the paw ipsilateral to the MIA-injected knee. Vortioxetine reduced the increased Ngf mRNA expression in the MIA-injected knees to the level in sham-injected counterparts. It reduced oxidative stress parameters in the affected knees, more effectively in females than males. Duloxetine showed no effect on Ngf mRNA expression and oxidative stress. Both antidepressants decreased mRNA expression of pain-related mediators in the lumbar L3-L5 ipsilateral DRGs and spinal cords, which were up-regulated in MIA-injected rats. This effect was male-specific. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Vortioxetine may be effective against the development of chronic pain in OA. Its antihyperalgesic effect may be mediated, at least in part, by normalization of NGF expression in the affected joint. Decrease of localized oxidative stress and of expression of pain-related mediators that contribute to central sensitization are also involved in vortioxetine's antihyperalgesic effect, in a sex-specific pattern.

Amitriptyline and duloxetine attenuate activities of superficial dorsal horn neurons in a rat reserpine-induced fibromyalgia model.

Fibromyalgia (FM) is an intractable disease with a chief complaint of chronic widespread pain. Amitriptyline (AMI) and duloxetine (DLX), which are antidepressant drugs, have been reported to ameliorate pain in patients with FM and pain-related behaviors in several rodent models of FM. However, the mechanisms of action of AMI and DLX are not yet fully understood. Here, we examined the effects of these drugs on the responsiveness of superficial dorsal horn (SDH) neurons in the spinal cord, using a rat FM model developed by injecting a biogenic amine depleter (reserpine). Extracellular recordings of SDH neurons in vivo demonstrated that bath application of AMI and DLX at concentrations of 0.1-1.0 mM on the dorsal surface of the spinal cord markedly suppressed spontaneous discharge and von Frey filament-evoked mechanical firing in SDH neurons. The suppression induced by the drugs was noted in a concentration-dependent manner and the suppressive effects resolved after washing the spinal cord surface. These results show that SDH neurons are the site of action for AMI and DLX in a rat reserpine-induced FM model. Spinal mechanisms may underlie the therapeutic effects of these drugs in patients with FM.

Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Recent Update on Pathophysiology and Treatment.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a major long-lasting side effect of some chemotherapy drugs, which threatens cancer survival rate. CIPN mostly affects sensory neurons and occasionally motor neurons, causing numbness, tingling, discomfort, and burning pain in the upper and lower extremities. The pathophysiology of CIPN is not completely understood; however, it is believed that chemotherapies induce peripheral neuropathy via directly damaging mitochondria, impairing the function of ion channels, triggering immunological mechanisms, and disrupting microtubules. The treatment of CIPN is a medical challenge, and there are no approved pharmacological options. Currently, duloxetine and other antidepressants, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and ion-channel targeted therapies are commonly used in clinics to relieve the symptoms of CIPN. Several other types of drugs, such as cannabinoids, sigma-1 receptor antagonists, and nicotinamides ribose, are being evaluated in preclinical and clinical studies. This paper summarizes the information related to the physiology of CIPN and medicines that could be used for treating this condition.

Duloxetine enhances PAX6 expression and suppresses innate immune responses in murine LPS-induced corneal inflammation.

BACKGROUND-AIM: PAX6 is a key regulator of eye development and epithelial homeostasis in the cornea. When deficient, chronic corneal inflammation, neovascularization and limbal stem cell deficiency can occur. Here we investigated the potential of duloxetine, a generic serotonin reuptake inhibitor that can upregulate PAX6 in vitro, for its in vivo activity in the context of corneal inflammation. METHODS: Duloxetine tolerance was tested in a human limbal stem cell line and isogenic CRISPR-knockout PAX6+/- cells. C57BL/6-Wildtype mice were administered duloxetine eye drops at concentrations of 1 µM - 2 mM and tested for toxicity and corneal PAX6 expression. In LPS-induced corneal inflammation in mice, duloxetine's effect on PAX6 expression, corneal opacification and inflammatory responses were evaluated by in vivo corneal imaging, immunostaining, and whole-transcriptome microarray analysis. RESULTS: No toxicity was observed in vitro for duloxetine concentrations up to 10µΜ. In vivo, duloxetine drops were well-tolerated up to 50 µM. Duloxetine drops at 10µΜ significantly upregulated PAX6 protein levels in the cornea by 30 % within 2 days. In the LPS model, duloxetine resulted in a sustained 33 % PAX6 protein upregulation in the cornea at 7 days, and in reduced opacity within 2 days, accompanied by a significant dampening of IL-17A signaling, neutrophil degranulation, microglial activation, macrophage markers, and MMP expression, despite non-significant changes in total inflammatory cell infiltration. CONCLUSION: Short-term administration of a repurposed generic drug, duloxetine, upregulates PAX6 protein levels in the cornea of mice and exerts an anti-inflammatory activity by dampening innate immune responses.

Effectiveness of Duloxetine versus Other Therapeutic Modalities in Patients with Diabetic Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a chronic complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) with symptoms like intense pain and impaired quality of life. This condition has no treatment; instead, the pain is managed with various antidepressants, including duloxetine. The aim of this study is to analyze the evidence on the efficacy of duloxetine in the management of DPN. Methods: A systematic search in different databases was conducted using the keywords "diabetic neuropathy", "duloxetine therapy", "neuropathic pain", and "Diabetes Mellitus". Finally, eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. Results: All articles comparing duloxetine at different doses vs. a placebo reported significant differences in favor of duloxetine on pain scales like 24 h Average Pain Severity (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.06, confidence interval [CI] = -1.09 to -1.03, and p < 0.00001) and BPI Severity (SMD = -0.70, CI = -0.72 to -0.68, and p < 0.00001), among others. A total of 75% of the meta-analyses of studies comparing duloxetine at different doses showed a tendency in favor of the 120 mg/d dose. There were significant differences in favor of duloxetine when compared to routine care on the Euro Quality of Life (SMD = -0.04, CI = -0.04 to -0.03, and p < 0.00001) and SF-36 Survey (SMD = -5.86, CI = -6.28 to -5.44, and p < 0.00001) scales. There were no significant differences on the visual analog scale (VAS) when comparing duloxetine and gabapentin. Conclusions: Duloxetine appears to be effective in the management of DPN in different pain, symptom improvement, and quality of life scales.

[Antidepressants in psychiatric practice]. / Antidepressanty v psikhiatricheskoi praktike.

The choice of antidepressants for depression or neurotic disorder is analyzed in the article. Drugs of the group of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are used for various mental disorders more often than other antidepressants according to clinical recommendations. Drugs of other groups (selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, tetracyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors) are used when the effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors is insufficient or the severity of the mental disorder is significant. The duration of therapy, if well tolerated, can range from several months to many years. Antidepressants from Canonpharma Production are successfully used in clinical practice: Sertraline Canon, Fluoxetine Canon, Escitalopram Canon, Duloxetine Canon, Mirtazapine Canon, Agomelatine Canon. These drugs have different mechanisms of action. They are used for various depression and other mental disorders. All antidepressants from Canonpharma Production have been tested for bioequivalence to the original drugs. This fact increases confidence in these medicines. Some features of the use of these antidepressants based on clinical recommendations and personal experience are discussed in the article.

PPARγ and AKt gene modulation following pregabalin and duloxetine combination for painful diabetic polyneuropathy.

Aim: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) induces chronic neuropathic pain in diabetic patients. Current treatments like pregabalin and duloxetine offer limited efficacy. This study evaluates combining pregabalin and duloxetine versus pregabalin alone for DPN pain relief, and explores gene modulation (PPARγ and Akt) to understand neuropathic pain's molecular basis.Materials & methods: Diabetic patients with DPN were randomized into groups receiving combination therapy or pregabalin alone for 4 weeks. Pain intensity, gene expression and quality of life were assessed.Results: Combination therapy significantly reduced pain, improved quality of life and upregulated PPARγ and Akt genes compared with monotherapy.Conclusion: Pregabalin and duloxetine combination therapy in DPN led to PPARγ mRNA upregulation and negative correlation of Akt gene expression with pain scores. This combination therapy effectively reduced pain and improved quality of life.Clinical Trial Registration: CTRI/2021/02/031068.

Combining medicines to reduce nerve pain in diabetic patientsWhat is this article about? People with diabetes often have nerve pain called diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Some medicines like pregabalin and duloxetine help, but are not enough. This study tested if using both medicines together works better than using just pregabalin. The study also looked at how these medicines affect certain genes.What were the results? Patients with DPN took either both medicines or just pregabalin for 4 weeks. The combined treatment reduced pain, improved life quality and affected certain genes.What do the results of the study mean? Using pregabalin and duloxetine together can reduce DPN pain more effectively. This offers hope for better treatment options.

Duloxetine to prevent neuropathy in breast cancer patients under paclitaxel chemotherapy (a double-blind randomized trial).

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is one of the major side effects and main reasons for affecting quality of life and dose reduction or even discontinuation of treatment in breast cancer patients. One of the most widely prescribed chemotherapies is the "taxanes." Considering that duloxetine has been used in treating neuropathies in recent years, this study aimed to investigate its effectiveness in preventing taxane-related neuropathy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial on 47 patients: 24 received a placebo and 23 received duloxetine at 30 mg daily in the first week following the injection of paclitaxel and 60 mg during the second week in each chemotherapy cycle. Patients objective (nerve conduction velocity (NCV) values) and subjective symptoms (visual analog scale including; neuropathy, paresthesia, pain, cold sensitivity, and numbness), the grades of the patients' neuropathy (calculated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.5), and the presence of complications, before and after each chemotherapy cycle, were recorded. RESULTS: The placebo group experienced significantly higher occurrences of new neuropathy (8/23 in duloxetine vs 16/24 in placebo, P = 0.029) in NCV by tibial nerve latency (- 0.28% vs 19.87%, P = 0.006), tibial amplitude (4.40% vs - 10.88%, P = 0.049), and median nerve latency (8.72% vs 31.16%, P = 0.039); administration of duloxetine significantly reduced the scores of neuropathies (P < 0.001), pain (P = 0.027), during chemotherapy, and 6 weeks later; however, no significant effect was observed on paresthesia, numbness, cold sensitivity, and other NCV measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Paclitaxel can cause neuropathy, lasting for a long time. Our study showed duloxetine is potentially an effective medication that can prevent subjective and objective neuropathy.

Amitriptyline, Pregabalin and Duloxetine for Treatment of Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy is one of the frequent presenting complaints in diabetes and endocrine clinics. Our main objective was to compare effectiveness of three commonly prescribed drugs: amitriptyline, pregabalin and duloxetine for treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. METHODS: This was a comparative, prospective, observational study conducted among 99 diabetic patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy having numeric rating pain scale ≥ 4. Thirty-three patients in each group were consecutively prescribed amitriptyline, pregabalin and duloxetine in lower dose (10mg/75mg/20mg) for first two weeks to gradually up titrate to higher dose (25mg/150mg/30mg) as per pain response for total duration of eight weeks. RESULTS: At the end of eight weeks, 84.9% in amitriptyline, 78.7% in pregabalin and 60.6% in duloxetine group had adequate pain reduction in form of mild or no pain. Among total patients, 42.5% patients had severe pain at baseline that decreased to 5% by the end of our study. Out of three drugs, 45.5% patients in amitriptyline group had complete resolution of pain as compared to 24.2% in pregabalin and 18.2% in duloxetine group (p value 0.05). Drowsiness (42.4%), dizziness (21.2%) and dry mouth (21.2%) were the commonest side effects among total participants in our study. CONCLUSIONS: Amitriptyline, pregabalin and duloxetine were all associated with adequate pain reduction among patients of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy in our study, however, amitriptyline had more favorable findings with tolerable side effects.

Diabetic Neuropathy: A Guide to Pain Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetic neuropathy is a common complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) and can affect up to 50% of DM patients during their lifetime. Patients typically present with numbness, tingling, pain, and loss of sensation in the extremities. Since there is no treatment targeting the underlying mechanism of neuropathy, strategies focus on preventative care and pain management. RECENT FINDINGS: Up to 69% of patients with diabetic neuropathy receive pharmacological treatment for neuropathic pain. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed four drugs for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN): pregabalin, duloxetine, tapentadol, and the 8% capsaicin patch. Nonpharmacological treatments such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) both show promise in reducing pain in DM patients. Despite the high burden associated with PDN, effective management remains challenging. This update covers the background and management of diabetic neuropathy, including its epidemiology, pathogenesis, preventative care, and current therapeutic strategies.

Cognitive improvement in late-life depression treated with vortioxetine and duloxetine in an eight-week randomized controlled trial: The role of age at first onset and change in depressive symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Age at first onset of depression as a clinical factor affecting cognitive improvement in late life depression was investigated. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of an eight-week randomized controlled trial involving 452 elderly patients treated by vortioxetine, duloxetine or placebo (1:1:1). Patients were subcategorized into early-onset (LLD-EO) and late-onset (LLD-LO) groups divided by onset age of 50. Cognitive performance was assessed by composite score of Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) and the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) tasks, while depressive symptoms were assessed by Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: Vortioxetine and duloxetine exhibited advantages versus placebo in improving cognitive performance in the LLD-LO group, yet not in the LLD-EO group after eight weeks. Patients in the LLD-EO group showed overall advantage to placebo in depressive symptoms before endpoint (week 8) of treatment, while patients in the LLO-LO group showed no advantage until endpoint. Path analysis suggested a direct effect of vortioxetine (B = 0.656, p = .036) and duloxetine (B = 0.726, p = .028) on improving cognition in the LLD-LO group, yet in all-patients treated set both medications improved cognition indirectly through changes of depressive symptoms. LIMITATION: Reliability of clinical history could raise caution as it was collected by subjective recall of patients. CONCLUSION: Age at first onset might affect cognitive improvement as well as change in depressive symptoms and its mediation towards cognitive improvement in late life depression treated with vortioxetine and duloxetine.

Effect of duloxetine on changes in serum proinflammatory cytokine levels in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Accumulating evidence supports the idea that inflammation may contribute to the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD). Duloxetine, a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, exhibits anti-inflammatory effects both in vitro and in vivo. In this study, we investigated the impact of duloxetine on changes in serum proinflammatory cytokine levels among individuals diagnosed with MDD. METHODS: A cohort of 23 drug-naïve individuals diagnosed with MDD and 23 healthy controls were included in this study. The severity of depressive symptoms was evaluated using the 24-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD-24). A panel of 7 proinflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß), IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and interferon-γ (IFN-γ), were quantified using multiplex Luminex assays. The levels of serum cytokines in healthy controls and patients with MDD were compared at baseline. All patients received duloxetine at a dosage range of 40-60 mg/day for a duration of 4 weeks. The HAMD-24 scores and serum cytokine levels were compared before and after duloxetine treatment. RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls, patients with MDD had significantly greater levels of IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, TNF-α, and IFN-γ (P < 0.05). Moreover, there was a significant decrease in HAMD-24 scores observed pre- and post-treatment (t = 13.161, P < 0.001). Furthermore, after 4 weeks of treatment, the serum levels of IL-8 (t = 3.605, P = 0.002), IL-12 (t = 2.559, P = 0.018), and IFN-γ (t = 3.567, P = 0.002) decreased significantly. However, there were no significant differences in other cytokines, including IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, and TNF-α, before and after treatment (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings present compelling evidence, potentially for the first time, indicating that duloxetine treatment may effectively reduce the serum concentrations of IL-8, IL-12, and IFN-γ in individuals diagnosed with MDD. However, the precise mechanisms underlying this effect remain unclear and warrant further investigation.

Pharmacotherapy in Stress Urinary Incontinence; A Literature Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a commonly observed condition in females, as well as in males who have undergone prostatectomy. Despite the significant progress made in surgical techniques, pharmacotherapy has not yielded substantial outcomes within the clinical domain. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the existing pharmacotherapy options for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and the emerging therapeutic targets in this field. RECENT FINDINGS: One meta-analysis demonstrated that α-adrenergic medications are more efficacious in improving rather than curing SUI symptoms. One trial showed reduced pad weight gain with PSD-503, a locally administered α-adrenergic receptor agonist. New data show that duloxetine's risk outweighs its benefits. One small-scale trial was found to support the use of locally administered estriol in improving subjective outcomes. Emerging targets include serotonin 5HT2C agonists, selective inhibitors of norepinephrine uptake, and myostatin inhibitors. Only one of the evaluated drugs, duloxetine, has been approved by some countries. Currently, trials are evaluating novel targets. Systemic adverse effects such as gastrointestinal upset with duloxetine and orthostatic hypotension with α-adrenoceptor agonists have hampered the efficacy of drugs used to treat SUI in women and men.

Duloxetine and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy with Phone-based Support for the Treatment of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Study Protocol of the PRECICE Randomized Control Trial.

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is the most common, disabling, and costly of all pain conditions. While evidence exists for the efficacy of both duloxetine and web-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) as monotherapy, there is a clear need to consider study of treatment components that may complement each other. In addition, given the reported association between patient's adherence and treatment outcomes, strategies are needed to enhance participant's motivation to adopt and maintain continued use of newly learned pain coping skills from CBT. Methods: Two hundred eighty participants will be recruited from the primary care clinics of a large academic health care system in North Carolina. Participants with CMP will be randomized to one of 3 treatment arms: (1) combination treatment (duloxetine + web-based self-guided CBT) with phone-based motivational interviewing (MI), (2) combination treatment without phone-based MI and (3) duloxetine monotherapy. Participants will be in the study for 24 weeks and will be assessed at baseline, week 13, and week 25. The primary outcome is the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)-Global Pain Severity score, which combines BPI pain severity and BPI pain interference. Secondary measures include between-group comparisons in mean BPI pain severity and BPI pain interference scores. Data collection and outcome assessment will be blinded to treatment group assignment. Discussion: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) will determine if combination treatment with duloxetine and web-based CBT is superior to duloxetine monotherapy for the management of CMP. Furthermore, this RCT will determine the effectiveness of phone-based motivational interviewing in promoting the continued practice of pain coping skills; thereby, enhancing treatment outcomes. Trial Registration: NCT04395001. Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on May 15, 2020.