Examining the Relationships Among Treatment, Pain, and Physical Function in Patients With Osteoarthritis: A Mediation-Modeling Approach.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the relationships among treatment, pain, and physical function (PF). METHODS: Data were collected from 2 published randomized clinical trials of osteoarthritis patients who received tanezumab or a placebo. PF was measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) PF domain. Pain (WOMAC pain domain) was a mediator of the effect of treatment on PF. A set of mediation models were investigated. Variables were treatment (tanezumab vs placebo), WOMAC pain domain, and WOMAC PF domain. Cross-sectional mediation models were assessed separately at different weeks. Longitudinal mediation models used data from all weeks simultaneously. Results could identify a steady-state period. RESULTS: The cross-sectional and longitudinal mediation models showed a stable indirect effect of treatment through the pain on PF across time, indicating that a pseudo-steady-state model was appropriate. Therefore, the longitudinal steady-state mediation models were used with all available data assuming relationships among variables in the model being the same at all time points; results showed that the indirect effect of the treatment on PF was 77.8% in study 1 (NCT02697773) and 74.1% in study 2 (NCT02709486), both P <0.0001, whereas the direct effect was 22.2% for study 1 ( P = 0.0003) and 25.9% for study 2 ( P = 0.0019). DISCUSSION: At least 75% of the treatment effect of tanezumab on physical functioning can be explained by the improvements in pain. However, tanezumab had an additional effect on physical functioning (~25%) that, was independent of improvements in pain. Such independent effects are of considerable interest and require further research to determine their mechanisms.

A practical guide to recognize, assess, treat and evaluate (RATE) primary care patients with chronic pain.

The management of patients with chronic pain is one of the most important issues In medicine and public health. Chronic pain conditions cause substantial suffering for patients, their significant others and society over years and even decades and increases healthcare utilization resources including the cost of medical care, loss of productivity and provision of disability services. Primary care providers are at the frontline in the identification and management of patients with chronic pain, as the majority of patients enter the healthcare system through primary care and are managed by primary care providers. Due to the complexity of chronic pain and the range of issues involved, the accurate diagnosis of the causes of pain and the formulation of effective treatment plans presents significant challenges in the primary care setting. In this review, we use the classification of pain types based on pathophysiology as the template to guide the assessment, treatment, and monitoring of patients with chronic pain conditions. We outline key methods that can be used to efficiently and accurately diagnose the putative pathophysiological mechanisms underlying chronic pain conditions and describe how this information should be used to tailor the treatment plan to meet the patient's needs. We discuss methods to evaluate patients and the impact of treatment plans over a series of consultations, with a particular focus on strategies to improve the patient's ability to self-manage their pain and related symptoms and perform daily functions despite persistent pain. Finally, we introduce the mnemonic RATE (Recognize, Assess, Treat, and Evaluate) as a general strategy that healthcare providers can use to aid their management of patients presenting with chronic pain.

Disparities across Diverse Populations in the Health and Treatment of Patients with Osteoarthritis.

The study of disparities across diverse populations regarding the health and treatment of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) is recognized as a priority for investigation and action by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) and the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS). OA is a common condition that increases with age, but with prevalence generally similar across racial and ethnic groups. However, disparities in the treatment of OA among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups are well-documented and continue to rise and persist. The reasons are complex, likely involving a combination of patient, provider, and healthcare system factors. Treatment disparities among these different populations have an impact on clinical outcomes, healthcare, and productivity, and are projected to increase significantly with the growing diversity of the United States population. The aim of this short review is to summarize studies of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities among patients with OA in the United States, with a focus on prevalence, treatment utilization, and clinical and economic outcomes.

Gender, age, disease severity, body mass index and diabetes may not affect response to subcutaneous tanezumab in patients with osteoarthritis after 16 weeks of treatment. A subgroup analysis of placebo-controlled trials.

AIM: To assess the impact of pre-specified patient characteristics on efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tanezumab in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Data were pooled from two (efficacy; N = 1545) or three (safety; N = 1754) phase 3 placebo-controlled trials. Change from baseline to week 16 in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain, WOMAC Physical Function and patient global assessment of OA (PGA-OA) scores was compared between tanezumab (2.5 and 5 mg) and placebo groups via analysis of covariance. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarised descriptively. Analyses were done in patient subgroups (men or women; age <65, ≥65, or ≥75 years; body mass index [BMI] <25, 25 to <30, 30 to <35 or ≥35 kg/m2 ; diabetes or no diabetes; baseline WOMAC Pain score <7 or ≥7; and Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] grades 2, 3 or 4 in the index joint) and the overall population. RESULTS: In all subgroups, improvements in WOMAC Pain were numerically greater and often statistically significant (P < .05) for both tanezumab groups compared with placebo. Results were similar for WOMAC Physical Function and PGA-OA. TEAE profiles were generally consistent across subgroups and similar to the overall population (ie slightly higher rates of TEAEs, serious TEAEs and severe TEAEs with tanezumab relative to placebo) with a few exceptions. Exceptions included women reporting slightly more TEAEs with tanezumab than men, and patients with diabetes reporting slightly more severe TEAEs with tanezumab than patients without diabetes. Additionally, TEAEs were more frequent with tanezumab than placebo in the age ≥65 and ≥75 years, but not the age <65 years, subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy and safety/tolerability of tanezumab may not be meaningfully impacted by gender, age, BMI, diabetes status, baseline pain severity or KL grade in the index joint. Conclusions are limited by low patient number in some subgroups. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02697773, NCT02709486, NCT01089725.

An evidence-based review of pregabalin for the treatment of fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVES: Pregabalin, an α2-δ agonist, is approved for the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) in the United States, Japan, and 37 other countries. The purpose of this article was to provide an in-depth, evidence-based summary of pregabalin for FM as demonstrated in randomized, placebo-controlled clinical studies, including open-label extensions, meta-analyses, combination studies and post-hoc analyses of clinical study data. METHODS: PubMed was searched using the term "pregabalin AND fibromyalgia" and the Cochrane Library with the term "pregabalin". Both searches were conducted on 2 March 2017 with no other date limits set. RESULTS: Eleven randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies were identified including parallel group, two-way crossover and randomized withdrawal designs. One was a neuroimaging study. Five open-label extensions were also identified. Evidence of efficacy was demonstrated across the studies identified with significant and clinically relevant improvements in pain, sleep quality and patient status. The safety and tolerability profile of pregabalin is consistent across all the studies identified, including in adolescents, with dizziness and somnolence the most common adverse events reported. These efficacy and safety data are supported by meta-analyses (13 studies). Pregabalin in combination with other pharmacotherapies (7 studies) is also efficacious. Post-hoc analyses have demonstrated the onset of pregabalin efficacy as early as 1-2 days after starting treatment, examined the effect of pregabalin on other aspects of sleep beyond quality, and shown it is effective irrespective of the presence of a wide variety of patient demographic and clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Pregabalin is a treatment option for FM; its clinical utility has been comprehensively demonstrated.

Normalizing fibromyalgia as a chronic illness.

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex chronic disease that affects 3-10% of the general adult population and is principally characterized by widespread pain, and is often associated with disrupted sleep, fatigue, and comorbidities, among other symptoms. There are many gaps in our knowledge of FM, such that, compared with other chronic illnesses including diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and asthma, it is far behind in terms of provider understanding and therapeutic approaches. The experience that healthcare professionals (HCPs) historically gained in developing approaches to manage and treat patients with these chronic illnesses may help show how they can address similar problems in patients with FM. In this review, we examine some of the issues around the management and treatment of FM, and discuss how HCPs can implement appropriate strategies for the benefit of patients with FM. These issues include understanding that FM is a legitimate condition, the benefits of prompt diagnosis, use of non-drug and pharmacotherapies, patient and HCP education, watchful waiting, and assessing patients by FM domain so as not to focus exclusively on one symptom to the detriment of others. Developing successful approaches is of particular importance for HCPs in the primary care setting who are in the ideal position to provide long-term care for patients with FM. In this way, FM may be normalized as a chronic illness to the benefit of both patients and HCPs.

Effects of Pregabalin in Patients with Neuropathic Pain Previously Treated with Gabapentin: A Pooled Analysis of Parallel-Group, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis compared the therapeutic response of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP) who had been previously treated with gabapentin to the therapeutic response in patients who had not received gabapentin previously. METHODS: Data were pooled from 18 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of pregabalin in patients with NeP. Pregabalin-mediated changes in pain and pain-related sleep interference scores, patient global impression of change scores at endpoint, and the occurrence of adverse events were compared between patients who had received gabapentin previously (+GBN) and patients who had not received gabapentin previously (-GBN). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the -GBN and +GBN cohorts with regard to the extent of pain relief and relief of pain-related sleep interference for any dose of pregabalin (150, 300, 600, or 150 to 600 mg/day) at any time point (6, 8, or 12 weeks). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the distribution of patient global impression of change scores at study endpoint, or the occurrence of adverse events, between the -GBN and +GBN cohorts. DISCUSSION: The findings presented here support the idea that pregabalin may be used successfully to treat patients with NeP who may be refractory, respond inadequately, or are intolerant to gabapentin. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring treatment of NeP based on individual patient response to different treatments, including the trial of multiple agents within the same mechanistic class.

Costs and Work Loss Burden of Diagnosed Opioid Abuse Among Employees on Workers Compensation or Short-term Disability.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 12-month healthcare costs between employees with versus without diagnosed opioid abuse within 12 months after an injury-related workers' compensation (WC) or short-term disability (STD) claim. METHODS: Retrospective study using 2003 to 2014 US insurance claims linked to administrative data on WC/STD claims. Multivariable models compared healthcare costs between employees with versus without diagnosed opioid abuse. RESULTS: Study included 107,975 opioid-treated employees with an injury-related WC or STD claim. Mean number of opioid prescription fills and adjusted total healthcare costs were substantially greater in employees with diagnosed opioid abuse versus without (WC: 13.4 vs. 4.5, P < 0.001; $18,073 vs. $8470, P < 0.001; STD: 13.7 vs. 4.5, P < 0.001; $25,693 vs. $14,939, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Opioids are commonly prescribed to employees with injury-related WC/STD claims. Employers may benefit from proactively addressing the issue of opioid abuse in these populations.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and open-label extension study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in the treatment of neuropathic pain associated with human immunodeficiency virus neuropathy.

The objective of these studies was to assess the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated neuropathic pain. Patients with HIV-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy (DSP) were randomized to treatment with flexible-dose pregabalin (150-600 mg/day) or placebo for 17 weeks in a single-blind, placebo lead-in, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled multinational trial. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in mean pain score on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) from baseline to study endpoint. Participants who completed this trial were invited to participate in a 6-month open-label extension study with pregabalin. Of the 377 patients enrolled in the randomized controlled trial (pregabalin, n=183; placebo, n=194), 68.4% completed treatment. In the open-label extension, 217 patients were treated and 59.4% completed treatment. Both studies were terminated by the sponsor after a preplanned interim analysis indicated trial futility. At endpoint, the change from baseline in least-squares mean NRS pain scores in the intent-to-treat population was -2.04 for pregabalin versus -2.11 for placebo (P=.709). There were no significant differences between the pregabalin and placebo groups in the secondary efficacy measures. Incidence of adverse events was lower than seen in previous pregabalin studies. Overall, this trial did not show pregabalin to be more efficacious than placebo in treating HIV-associated DSP. Studies such as these, which fail to support their primary hypotheses, may be important in informing the methodology of future trials, especially when novel approaches to limit variability in the control group are included. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01049217 and NCT01145417.

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of pregabalin in older patients with neuropathic pain: results from a pooled analysis of 11 clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Older patients are typically underrepresented in clinical trials of medications for chronic pain. A post hoc analysis of multiple clinical studies of pregabalin in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) or postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in older patients. METHODS: Data from 11 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical studies of pregabalin in patients with DPN or PHN were pooled. Efficacy outcomes included change in Daily Pain Rating Scale score, ≥30% and ≥50% responders, and endpoint pain score ≤3. Safety was based on adverse events (AEs). Primary efficacy was analyzed by analysis of covariance with terms for treatment, age category, protocol, baseline pain, and treatment-by-age category interaction. RESULTS: 2516 patients (white, n = 2344 [93.2%]; men, n = 1347 [53.5%]; PHN, n = 1003 [39.9%]; pregabalin, n = 1595) were included in the analysis. Patients were grouped by age: 18 to 64 years (n = 1236), 65 to 74 years (n = 766), and ≥75 years (n = 514). Baseline mean pain and sleep interference scores were comparable across treatment and age groups. Significant improvements in endpoint mean pain were observed for all pregabalin dosages versus placebo in all age groups (p ≤ 0.0009), except for the lowest dosage (150 mg/day) in the youngest age group. Clinically meaningful pain relief, defined as ≥30% and ≥50% pain response, was observed in all age groups. The most common AEs were dizziness, somnolence, peripheral edema, asthenia, dry mouth, weight gain, and infections. The relative risks for these AEs increased with pregabalin dose, but did not appear related to older age or type of neuropathic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Pregabalin (150-600 mg/day) significantly reduced pain in older patients (age ≥65 years) with neuropathic pain and improvements in pain were comparable to those observed in younger patients. Titration of pregabalin to the lowest effective dose should allow for effective pain relief while minimizing AEs in older patients with neuropathic pain. Given the common use of polypharmacy in older patients, the absence of known drug-drug interactions makes pregabalin an important treatment option for older patients with pain of neuropathic origin.