QTc Shortening on Electrocardiogram With Amitriptyline May Indicate No Effect on Pain Relief in Burning Mouth Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is an intractable chronic pain disorder characterized by a burning sensation without organic abnormalities in the oral mucosa. Amitriptyline may be effective for BMS or, conversely, may exacerbate pain. QTc is necessary for monitoring psychotropic adverse effects, but it is not known if it is a predictor of efficacy for BMS. We investigated the efficacy of amitriptyline in BMS and its effect on QTc. METHODS: Visual analog scale and electrocardiogram were examined before and 1 month after treatment in 51 consecutive patients diagnosed with BMS according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, Third Edition (ICHD-3), criteria and treated with amitriptyline. RESULTS: There were 26 amitriptyline responders and 25 nonresponders, with no differences in age, sex, and amitriptyline dosage. Amitriptyline responders showed little change in QTc, whereas nonresponders showed a trend toward significantly shorter QTc. Changes in visual analog scale correlated statistically significantly with changes in QTc (Spearman rank correlation coefficient: 0384; P = 0.0054). The degree of pain tended to worsen with QTc shortening. CONCLUSION: Amitriptyline provides analgesia in about half of BMS patients, but some BMS patients have worse pain with amitriptyline. Not only do changes in the QTc detect amitriptyline adverse effects with prolongation, but also, conversely, its shortening predicts amitriptyline ineffectiveness.

Adverse drug events associated with nortriptyline compared with paroxetine and alternative medications in an older adult population: a retrospective cohort study in Southern California.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate risk for falls, fractures and syncope in older adult patients treated with nortriptyline compared with paroxetine and alternative medications. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The electronic medical record and prescription drug database of a large integrated healthcare system in Southern California. PARTICIPANTS: Ambulatory patients, age ≥65 years diagnosed with depression, anxiety disorder or peripheral neuropathy, dispensed one or more of ten study medications between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: HR for falls, fractures and syncope with exposure to study medications adjusted for patient demographic variables and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 195 207 subjects, 19 305 falls, 15 088 fractures and 11 313 episodes of syncope were observed during the study period. Compared with the reference medication, nortriptyline, the adjusted HRs (aHRs) for falls were statistically significantly greater for: paroxetine (aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.57), amitriptyline (1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.33), venlafaxine (1.44, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.56), duloxetine (1.25, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.40), fluoxetine (1.51, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.59), sertraline (1.53, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.62), citalopram (1.61, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.71) and escitalopram (1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.54), but not gabapentin (0.95, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.02). For fractures, compared with nortriptyline, aHRs were significantly greater for: paroxetine, venlafaxine, duloxetine, fluoxetine, sertraline, citalopram, escitalopram and gabapentin, with aHRs ranging from 1.30 for gabapentin to 1.82 for escitalopram; risk was statistically similar for amitriptyline. For syncope, the aHRs were significantly greater for: paroxetine, venlafaxine, fluoxetine, sertraline and citalopram, with aHRs ranging from 1.19 for fluoxetine and paroxetine up to 1.30 for citalopram and sertraline; risk was similar for amitriptyline, duloxetine, escitalopram and gabapentin. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with therapeutic alternatives, nortriptyline was found to represent a lower risk for falls, fractures and syncope, versus comparator medications, except for a few instances that had equivalent risk. The risk for these adverse events from paroxetine was comparable to the alternative medications.

Amitriptyline at Low-Dose and Titrated for Irritable Bowel Syndrome as Second-Line Treatment in primary care (ATLANTIS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are managed in primary care. When first-line therapies for IBS are ineffective, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline suggests considering low- dose tricyclic antidepressants as second-line treatment, but their effectiveness in primary care is unknown, and they are infrequently prescribed in this setting. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Amitriptyline at Low-Dose and Titrated for Irritable Bowel Syndrome as Second-Line Treatment [ATLANTIS]) was conducted at 55 general practices in England. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, with Rome IV IBS of any subtype, and ongoing symptoms (IBS Severity Scoring System [IBS-SSS] score ≥75 points) despite dietary changes and first-line therapies, a normal full blood count and C-reactive protein, negative coeliac serology, and no evidence of suicidal ideation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to low-dose oral amitriptyline (10 mg once daily) or placebo for 6 months, with dose titration over 3 weeks (up to 30 mg once daily), according to symptoms and tolerability. Participants, their general practitioners, investigators, and the analysis team were all masked to allocation throughout the trial. The primary outcome was the IBS-SSS score at 6 months. Effectiveness analyses were according to intention-to-treat; safety analyses were on all participants who took at least one dose of the trial medication. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN48075063) and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2019, and April 11, 2022, 463 participants (mean age 48·5 years [SD 16·1], 315 [68%] female to 148 [32%] male) were randomly allocated to receive low-dose amitriptyline (232) or placebo (231). Intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome showed a significant difference in favour of low-dose amitriptyline in IBS-SSS score between groups at 6 months (-27·0, 95% CI -46·9 to -7·10; p=0·0079). 46 (20%) participants discontinued low-dose amitriptyline (30 [13%] due to adverse events), and 59 (26%) discontinued placebo (20 [9%] due to adverse events) before 6 months. There were five serious adverse reactions (two in the amitriptyline group and three in the placebo group), and five serious adverse events unrelated to trial medication. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the largest trial of a tricyclic antidepressant in IBS ever conducted. Titrated low-dose amitriptyline was superior to placebo as a second-line treatment for IBS in primary care across multiple outcomes, and was safe and well tolerated. General practitioners should offer low-dose amitriptyline to patients with IBS whose symptoms do not improve with first-line therapies, with appropriate support to guide patient-led dose titration, such as the self-titration document developed for this trial. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (grant reference 16/162/01).

Pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea carries a significant burden, but evidence-based treatment guidance is incomplete, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA) of pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea. PubMed Central/PsycInfo/Cochrane Central database/Clinicaltrials.gov/WHO-ICTRP and the Chinese Electronic Journal Database (Qikan.cqvip.com) were searched for published/unpublished RCTs of antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea (any definition) in adults, up to 06/12/2023. We assessed global/local inconsistencies, publication bias, risk of bias (RoB2), and confidence in the evidence, conducting subgroup/sensitivity analyses. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were changes in saliva production (standardized mean difference/SMD) and study-defined response (risk ratios/RRs). The acceptability outcome was all-cause discontinuation (RR). Primary nodes were molecules; the mechanism of action (MoA) was secondary. Thirty-four RCTs entered a systematic review, 33 NMA (n = 1958). All interventions were for clozapine-induced sialorrhea in subjects with mental disorders. Regarding individual agents and response, metoclopramide (RR = 3.11, 95% C.I. = 1.39-6.98), cyproheptadine, (RR = 2.76, 95% C.I. = 2.00-3.82), sulpiride (RR = 2.49, 95% C.I. = 1.65-3.77), propantheline (RR = 2.39, 95% C.I. = 1.97-2.90), diphenhydramine (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.88-2.86), benzhexol (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.59-3.38), doxepin (RR = 2.30, 95% C.I. = 1.85-2.88), amisulpride (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.30-3.81), chlorpheniramine (RR = 2.20, 95% C.I. = 1.67-2.89), amitriptyline (RR = 2.09, 95% C.I. = 1.34-3.26), atropine, (RR = 2.03, 95% C.I. = 1.22-3.38), and astemizole, (RR = 1.70, 95% C.I. = 1.28-2.26) outperformed placebo, but not glycopyrrolate or ipratropium. Across secondary nodes (k = 28, n = 1821), antimuscarinics (RR = 2.26, 95% C.I. = 1.91-2.68), benzamides (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.75-3.10), TCAs (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.72), and antihistamines (RR = 2.18, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.59) outperformed placebo. In head-to-head comparisons, astemizole and ipratropium were outperformed by several interventions. All secondary nodes, except benzamides, outperformed the placebo on the continuous efficacy outcome. For nocturnal sialorrhea, neither benzamides nor atropine outperformed the placebo. Active interventions did not differ significantly from placebo regarding constipation or sleepiness/drowsiness. Low-confidence findings prompt caution in the interpretation of the results. Considering primary nodes' co-primary efficacy outcomes and head-to-head comparisons, efficacy for sialorrhea is most consistent for the following agents, decreasing from metoclopramide through cyproheptadine, sulpiride, propantheline, diphenhydramine, benzhexol, doxepin, amisulpride, chlorpheniramine, to amitriptyline, and atropine (the latter not for nocturnal sialorrhea). Shared decision-making with the patient should guide treatment decisions regarding clozapine-related sialorrhea.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention-part 1: amitriptyline.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to critically re-appraise the published trials assessing amitriptyline for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We report our methods and results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of pharmacologic treatments for migraine prophylaxis. We included randomized trials that compared amitriptyline with placebo for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Our outcomes of interest were informed by the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) and include the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in migraine days per month, migraine days per month, and adverse events leading to discontinuation. We assessed risk of bias by using a modified Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search yielded 10.826 unique records, of which three trials (n = 622) were eligible for data synthesis and analysis. We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo (relative risk: 1.60 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.19); absolute risk difference: 165 more per 1,000 (95% CI 47 more to 327 more). We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.05 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.10); absolute risk difference: 50 more per 1,000 (95% CI 10 more to 100 more). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that amitriptyline may have a prophylactic role in migraine patients, however these results are far from robust. This warrants further large-scale research to evaluate the role of amitriptyline in migraine prevention.

An investigation of the potential effects of amitriptyline on polycystic ovary syndrome induced by estradiol valerate.

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is frequently observed in adolescent women and usually progresses with depression. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of amitriptyline (Ami), a drug used in the treatment of depression, in individuals with PCOS. Forty 12-week-old female Wistar albino rats were randomly divided into five groups: control, sham, PCOS, Ami, and PCOS + Ami. To induce the syndrome in the PCOS groups, a single dose of 4 mg/kg estradiol valerate was administered by intraperitoneal injection; 10 mg/kg Ami was administered by intraperitoneal injection for 30 days in the Ami groups. After 30 days, all the animals were sacrificed and blood, ovary, and brain tissues were collected and subjected to routine tissue processing. Stereological, histopathological analyses were performed on the ovarian sections, while luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), catalase (CAT), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) levels were investigated in blood samples. The volume of the corpus luteum and preantral follicles increased in the PCOS group, while a decrease was determined in the number of antral follicles using stereological methods. Biochemical analysis revealed that FSH levels increased and CAT enzyme levels decreased in the PCOS group. Significant morphological changes were observed in ovaries from the PCOS group. The volume of the corpus luteum in the PCOS + Ami group decreased compared to the PCOS group. Serum FSH levels decreased in the PCOS + Ami group, while CAT enzyme levels increased compared to the PCOS group. Degenerative areas were also seen in the PCOS + Ami group ovaries. Ami administration was unable to sufficiently ameliorate the morphological and biochemical changes caused in the ovarian tissues by PCOS. In addition, this study is one of the few studies examining the effects of amitriptyline, an antidepressant frequently used in depression treatment of individuals with PCOS. We also observed firstly that use of amitriptyline caused PCOS-like ovarian morphology in healthy rat ovaries, while it had a healing effect by volume decreasing of cystic structures in the ovary with PCOS.

Therapeutic potential of amitriptyline for paraquat-induced pulmonary fibrosis: Involvement of caveolin-1-mediated anti-epithelial-mesenchymal transition and inhibition of apoptosis.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment of pulmonary fibrosis caused by paraquat (PQ) poisoning remains problematic. Amitriptyline (AMT) has multiple pharmacological effects. Here we investigated the anti-fibrotic effect of AMT on PQ-induced pulmonary fibrosis and its possible mechanism. METHODS: C57BL/6 mice were randomly divided into control, PQ, PQ + AMT and AMT groups. Histopathology of the lungs, blood gas analysis, and levels of hydroxyproline (HYP), transforming growth factor ß1 (TGF-ß1) and interleukin 17 (IL-17) were measured. The siRNA transfection inhibited caveolin-1 in A549 cells, which induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) by PQ and followed intervention with AMT. E-cadherin, N-cadherin, α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and caveolin-1 were studied by immunohistochemistry and western blot analysis. The apoptosis rate was measured by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Compared with the PQ group, the PQ + AMT group displayed mild pathological changes in pulmonary fibrosis, lower HYP, IL-17 and TGF- ß1 levels in lung, but high TGF- ß1 in serum. Levels of N-cadherin and α-SMA in the lungs were significantly decreased, but caveolin-1 was increased, while SaO2 and PaO2 levels were higher. Compared with the PQ group, the apoptosis rate, N-cadherin and α-SMA levels in A549 cells were significantly decreased after PQ treatment and high dose AMT intervention (p < 0.01). The expressions of E-cadherin, N-cadherin and α-SMA in the PQ-induced cells transfected with caveolin-1 siRNA or siControl RNA were significantly different (p < 0.01), but the apoptosis rate was unaltered. CONCLUSION: AMT inhibited PQ-induced EMT in A549 cells and improved lung histopathology and oxygenation in mice by up-regulating caveolin-1.

Off-label low dose amitriptyline for insomnia disorder: Patient-reported outcomes.

PURPOSE: Low dose amitriptyline is prescribed off-label to improve sleep maintenance in patients with insomnia disorder. Data on treatment outcomes are limited. We aimed to assess patient-reported treatment effect and side effects of low dose amitriptyline for insomnia in routine care data. METHODS: Cross-sectional study: Seven hundred fifty-two consecutive patients with insomnia disorder having sleep maintenance problems were treated in an outpatient sleep clinic with low dose amitriptyline (10-20 mg based on self-titration). Treatment was intended to improve sleep maintenance. Before the planned follow-up consultation (approximately 6 weeks after start treatment) patients completed an online treatment evaluation questionnaire. Treatment (dose, adherence), sleep, fatigue, satisfaction and side effects were assessed by multiple-choice questions with room for free-text elaboration. RESULTS: 53.7% of the patients reported to use amitriptyline up to 10 mg/day, 42.9% used a self-increased dose of mostly 20 mg/day, while 3.5% had discontinued treatment. 73.9% of the total study population reported improvement of sleep maintenance, 31.3% improved sleep onset, 35.2% improved daytime fatigue, and 45.8% reported to be (very) satisfied with treatment results. 66.1% reported at least one side effect. The reported side effects were generally the already known side effects of amitriptyline. CONCLUSION: These patient-reported outcomes support the clinical observations that low dose amitriptyline improves sleep maintenance on the short term and that it is generally well tolerated. This further justifies randomized controlled trials in patients with insomnia disorder and sleep maintenance problems to assess the effectiveness and safety of low dose amitriptyline on the short and long term.

[A naturalistic study on the effects of antidepressants (e. g. SSRI) and acetyl salicylic acid (ASA) on the self-rated perception of the psychotherapeutic process of inpatient psychosomatic treatment and its results: Could ASA be beneficial?] / Eine naturalistische Untersuchung zur Auswirkung häufiger antidepressiver Medikationen (wie SSRI) und der Acetylsalicylsäure (ASS) auf die Selbstbeurteilungen der Wahrnehmung und des Ergebnisses stationärer Psychotherapie: Könnte ASS förderlich sein?

Objectives: Psychic perceptions are at the core of psychotherapeutic processes and modifiable by certain psychopharmacologic agents including antidepressants and cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors like acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). Methods: We analyzed the medical records of 208 participants, and used the weekly mean dosages and the number of weeks in therapy to predict ward experience (Stationserfahrungsbogen) and symptom burden (symptom-check list 90-R) by means of linear regression analyses and four repeated measures. Results: Time predicted symptom relief. ASA signified a more favorable ward experience and a trend towards less suffering. Antidepressants did not predict symptom burden or ward experience, except for amitriptyline's inverse relationship with process perception. Discussion: Regarding process perception and therapy outcome, amitriptyline might have unfavorable effects at dose reductions, whereas COX-inhibition could be beneficial at higher dosages. Similar findings have already been described with regard to COX-inhibition in depression and schizophrenia.

Effect of amitriptyline on learning and memory consolidation in the male Wistar rats with an experimental model of pentylenetetrazole-induced seizure

Abstract Amitriptyline (AMT) was developed for the treatment of chronic and neuropathic pain. There is also evidence it may be useful in the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders. In this regard, the effect of on the experimental model of seizures and memory impairment caused by seizures in rats is investigated in the present study. Seizures in Wistar rats (200-250 g) were induced by pentylenetetrazole (PTZ, 60 mg/kg, intraperitoneally (i.p.)). The anticonvulsant effect of AMT (10 and 20 mg/kg, i.p.) was evaluated in the seizure model. The effect on memory was assessed using passive avoidance (PA) learning and memory test. After behavioral tests, the animals underwent deep anesthesia and were put down painlessly. Animal serum was isolated for oxidant/antioxidant assays (malondialdehyde (MDA), and glutathione peroxidase (GPx)). Intraperitoneal injection of AMT decreased the mean number of myoclonic jerks and generalized tonic-clonic seizure (GTCS) duration and increased the mean latency of myoclonic jerk and GTCS compared to the PTZ group. Moreover, in the PA test, AMT caused a significant increase in retention latency (RL) and total time spent in the light compartment (TLC) compared to the PTZ group. Biochemical tests showed that AMT was able to significantly increase GPx serum levels and significantly reduce MDA serum levels compared to the PTZ group. Overall, this study suggests the potential neuroprotective effects of the AMT drug in a model of memory impairment caused by seizures via the mechanism of inhibition of the oxidative stress pathway.

Optimal pharmacotherapy pathway in adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain: the OPTION-DM RCT.

BACKGROUND: The mainstay of treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain is pharmacotherapy, but the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline is not based on robust evidence, as the treatments and their combinations have not been directly compared. OBJECTIVES: To determine the most clinically beneficial, cost-effective and tolerated treatment pathway for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. DESIGN: A randomised crossover trial with health economic analysis. SETTING: Twenty-one secondary care centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain with a 7-day average self-rated pain score of ≥ 4 points (Numeric Rating Scale 0-10). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to three commonly used treatment pathways: (1) amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, (2) duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin and (3) pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline. Participants and research teams were blinded to treatment allocation, using over-encapsulated capsules and matching placebos. Site pharmacists were unblinded. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the difference in 7-day average 24-hour Numeric Rating Scale score between pathways, measured during the final week of each pathway. Secondary end points included 7-day average daily Numeric Rating Scale pain score at week 6 between monotherapies, quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-36 items), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score, the proportion of patients achieving 30% and 50% pain reduction, Brief Pain Inventory - Modified Short Form items scores, Insomnia Severity Index score, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory score, tolerability (scale 0-10), Patient Global Impression of Change score at week 16 and patients' preferred treatment pathway at week 50. Adverse events and serious adverse events were recorded. A within-trial cost-utility analysis was carried out to compare treatment pathways using incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years from an NHS and social care perspective. RESULTS: A total of 140 participants were randomised from 13 UK centres, 130 of whom were included in the analyses. Pain score at week 16 was similar between the arms, with a mean difference of -0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.3 points) for duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, a mean difference of -0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.3 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin and a mean difference of 0.0 points (98.3% confidence interval -0.4 to 0.4 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin. Results for tolerability, discontinuation and quality of life were similar. The adverse events were predictable for each drug. Combination therapy (weeks 6-16) was associated with a further reduction in Numeric Rating Scale pain score (mean 1.0 points, 98.3% confidence interval 0.6 to 1.3 points) compared with those who remained on monotherapy (mean 0.2 points, 98.3% confidence interval -0.1 to 0.5 points). The pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline pathway had the fewest monotherapy discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events and was most commonly preferred (most commonly preferred by participants: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, 24%; duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin, 33%; pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, 43%; p = 0.26). No single pathway was superior in cost-effectiveness. The incremental gains in quality-adjusted life-years were small for each pathway comparison [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin -0.002 (95% confidence interval -0.011 to 0.007) quality-adjusted life-years, amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline -0.006 (95% confidence interval -0.002 to 0.014) quality-adjusted life-years and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline 0.007 (95% confidence interval 0.0002 to 0.015) quality-adjusted life-years] and incremental costs over 16 weeks were similar [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin -£113 (95% confidence interval -£381 to £90), amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £155 (95% confidence interval -£37 to £625) and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £141 (95% confidence interval -£13 to £398)]. LIMITATIONS: Although there was no placebo arm, there is strong evidence for the use of each study medication from randomised placebo-controlled trials. The addition of a placebo arm would have increased the duration of this already long and demanding trial and it was not felt to be ethically justifiable. FUTURE WORK: Future research should explore (1) variations in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain management at the practice level, (2) how OPTION-DM (Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus) trial findings can be best implemented, (3) why some patients respond to a particular drug and others do not and (4) what options there are for further treatments for those patients on combination treatment with inadequate pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: The three treatment pathways appear to give comparable patient outcomes at similar costs, suggesting that the optimal treatment may depend on patients' preference in terms of side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered as ISRCTN17545443 and EudraCT 2016-003146-89. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme, and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The number of people with diabetes is growing rapidly in the UK and is predicted to rise to over 5 million by 2025. Diabetes causes nerve damage that can lead to severe painful symptoms in the feet, legs and hands. One-quarter of all people with diabetes experience these symptoms, known as 'painful diabetic neuropathy'. Current individual medications provide only partial benefit, and in only around half of patients. The individual drugs, and their combinations, have not been compared directly against each other to see which is best. We conducted a study to see which treatment pathway would be best for patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. The study included three treatment pathways using combinations of amitriptyline, duloxetine and pregabalin. Patients received all three treatment pathways (i.e. amitriptyline treatment for 6 weeks and pregabalin added if needed for a further 10 weeks, duloxetine treatment for 6 weeks and pregabalin added if needed for a further 10 weeks and pregabalin treatment for 6 weeks and amitriptyline added if needed for a further 10 weeks); however, the order of the treatment pathways was decided at random. We compared the level of pain that participants experienced in each treatment pathway to see which worked best. On average, people said that their pain was similar after each of the three treatments and their combinations. However, two treatments in combination helped some patients with additional pain relief if they only partially responded to one. People also reported improved quality of life and sleep with the treatments, but these were similar for all the treatments. In the health economic analysis, the value for money and quality of life were similar for each pathway, and this resulted in uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness conclusions, with no one pathway being more cost-effective than the others. The treatments had different side effects, however; pregabalin appeared to make more people feel dizzy, duloxetine made more people nauseous and amitriptyline resulted in more people having a dry mouth. The pregabalin supplemented by amitriptyline pathway had the smallest number of treatment discontinuations due to side effects and may be the safest for patients.

QTc Prolongation in Poison Center Exposures to CredibleMeds List of Substances with "Known Risk of Torsades de Pointes".

Many drugs carry some risk of QT interval prolongation, which can lead to life-threatening dysrhythmias including Torsades de Pointes (TdP). CredibleMeds.org identifies medications categorized as "Known Risk of TdP" but does not stratify risk in acute supratherapeutic ingestions. We sought to determine the proportion of cases exhibiting QTc prolongation and life-threatening dysrhythmias including ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), TdP, and asystole in patients exposed to these substances. Retrospective chart review of cases reported to our Regional Poison Center from 2014 to 2019 of exposures to one or more of the "Known Risk" substances was performed. Demographics, therapies, clinical effects, and medical outcome for each case were analyzed. There were 1125 exposures, of which 760 had a documented QTc interval. QTc ≥ 500 ms was reported in 138 (18.2%) of the 760 cases. The most common "Known Risk" substances were citalopram, escitalopram and cocaine. Although not in the "Known Risk" category, mirtazapine, amitriptyline, diphenhydramine, and trazodone had a statistically significant association with QTc > 500 ms. Life-threatening dysrhythmias occurred in 13 cases, with VT/VF in 6 of the 760 (0.8%) cases, and one case of TdP. Flecainide (OR 11.1, 95% CI 2.2-55.8) and methadone (OR 7.1, 95% CI 2.1-23.4) were associated with increased risk of all life-threatening dysrhythmias. Exposures to medications on the Credible Meds list of "Known Risk of TdP" QTc prolongation is common, but life-threatening dysrhythmias are rare. Mirtazapine, amitriptyline, diphenhydramine, and trazodone were associated with prolonged QTc. Flecainide and methadone had the highest associated risk of life-threatening dysrhythmias.

Amitriptyline for post-COVID headache: effectiveness, tolerability, and response predictors.

BACKGROUND: Headache is one of the most frequently reported symptoms in post-COVID patients. The clinical phenotype of COVID-19 headache combines phenotypic features of both tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine. We aimed to assess the effectiveness, side effects and predictors of amitriptyline (AMT) response in a real-world study setting. METHODS: We performed an observational multicentric study with a retrospective cohort. All consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection who received AMT for post-COVID headache from March 2020 to May 2021 were included. Response was evaluated by the reduction in the number of headache days per month (HDM) between weeks 8 and 12, compared with the baseline. We explored which variables were associated with a higher probability of response to AMT. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were eligible for the study, 40/48 (83.3%) females, aged 46.85 (SD: 13.59) years. Patients had history of migraine 15/48 (31.3%) or TTH 5/48 (10.4%). The mean reduction of HDM was 9.6 (SD: 10.9; 95% CI 6.5, 12.7) days. Only 2/48 (5%) of patients discontinued AMT due to poor tolerability. History of TTH (10.9, 95% CI 1.3, 20.6) and nausea (- 8.5, 95% CI - 14.6, - 2.5) were associated with AMT response. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides real-world evidence of the potential benefit of AMT in patients with post-COVID-19 headache, especially in patients with history of TTH and without concomitant nausea.

Amitriptyline at low-dose and titrated for irritable bowel syndrome as second-line treatment (The ATLANTIS trial): protocol for a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common functional bowel disorder that has a considerable impact on patient quality of life and substantial societal and health care resource costs. Current treatments are often ineffective. Tricyclic antidepressants have shown promise in secondary care populations but their effectiveness in a primary care setting remains unclear. METHODS: ATLANTIS is a randomised, multi-centre, parallel-group, two-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of low-dose amitriptyline as a second-line treatment for IBS in primary care. Participants will be invited by letter, or recruited opportunistically, from general practices in three regions of England (West Yorkshire, Wessex, and West of England) and screened for eligibility. A total of 518 adult patients with IBS, who are symptomatic despite first-line therapies, will be randomised 1:1 to amitriptyline or identical placebo for 6 months. Treatment will commence at a dose of 10 mg (or one placebo tablet) daily at night, with dose titration up to a maximum of 30 mg at night, depending on side effects and response to treatment. Participant-reported assessments will be conducted at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary objective is to determine the effectiveness of amitriptyline, compared with placebo, in improving participant-reported global symptoms of IBS at 6 months (using the IBS Severity Scoring System). Secondary outcomes include relief of IBS symptoms, effect on IBS-associated somatic symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-12), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), ability to work and participate in other activities (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), acceptability and tolerability of treatment, self-reported health care use, health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), and cost-effectiveness. A nested, qualitative study will explore patient and general practitioner experiences of treatments and trial participation, including acceptability, adherence, unanticipated effects, and implications for wider use of amitriptyline for IBS in primary care. DISCUSSION: Determining the clinical and cost-effectiveness of low-dose amitriptyline as a second-line treatment for IBS in primary care will provide robust evidence to inform management decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN48075063 . Registered on 7th June 2019.

Risk of maculopathy with pentosan polysulfate sodium use.

AIMS: Recent epidemiologic studies have examined the risk of maculopathy with pentosan polysulfate sodium (PPS), a drug indicated for the treatment of interstitial cystitis. However, results have been contradictory. Thus, we quantified the risk of maculopathy with PPS with a focus on risk with duration of use. METHODS: We used a new user, retrospective cohort study with an active comparator. We created a cohort of mutually exclusive 6221 PPS users and 89 744 amitriptyline users, a tricyclic antidepressant also used for the treatment of pain secondary to interstitial cystitis. Subjects were selected from the PharMetrics Plus database (IQVIA, Durham, NC) from 2006 to 2020. Cohort members were followed to the first event of the study outcome (maculopathy) or end of enrolment. A Cox regression model was constructed to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 3.0 years for PPS users and amitriptyline users. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for maculopathy in PPS users was 2.64 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.90-3.68). The HR for the sensitivity analysis that combined maculopathy and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.16-1.65). A cumulative duration-response pattern was observed, with use greater than 3 years having a 9.5-fold risk of maculopathy (HR = 9.56, 95% CI: 3.60-25.37) compared to a 2.3-fold risk of maculopathy with use for 1 year or less (HR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.50-3.43). The number needed to harm for the first 4 years of use was 250. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest an increased risk of maculopathy with PPS use, particularly with longer duration of use.

Venlafaxine can reduce the migraine attacks as well as amitriptyline: A noninferiority randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Migraine, as a primary headache, is among the leading causes of disability worldwide. The present study aimed at comparing the effects of venlafaxine (VLF) and amitriptyline (AMT) reducing the severity and the number of migraine attacks. METHODS: Patients with complaints of migraine attacks were randomly divided into two groups. The first group received amitriptyline at a dose of 25 mg every night, and the second group received venlafaxine at a dose of 37.5 mg daily. The duration of treatment was eight weeks. RESULTS: Eighty patients participated in the current study, out of which 57.5% were females. The mean age of the participants was 33 years, and the mean duration of disease was eight years. Both amitriptyline and venlafaxine significantly reduced the number of attacks per month (AMT: from 10.98 to 2.98, VLF: from 9.98 to 3.18), and six-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) score (AMT: from 67.78 to 49.73, VLF: from 66.65 to 48.88), and no significant difference was observed between the two drugs. The results demonstrated no significant relationship between age or disease duration with the score of the HIT-6. The decrease rate in the score of the HIT-6 in males was higher than that of females which shows the modifier role of the gender. Besides, it is noteworthy to mention that the adverse effects of amitriptyline exceeded the venlafaxine among the patients. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of AMT and VLF in terms of their potential to reduce the intensity and duration of headaches was more noticeable in male patients than female patients. In terms of adverse drug reactions, patients in the amitriptyline group complained more about adverse drug reactions (ADR) than patients in the venlafaxine group. It seems that in similar conditions, venlafaxine could have priority over amitriptyline in migraine prophylaxis.

Efficacy of amitriptyline in pediatric functional abdominal pain disorders: A randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Amitriptyline improves symptoms in functional abdominal pain disorders (FAPD) in adults with variable results in pediatric studies. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of amitriptyline in pediatric FAPD. METHODS: In this open-label trial, children (≤ 18 years) diagnosed as FAPD based on ROME IV criteria were randomized to amitriptyline or placebo for 12 weeks. Post-treatment improvement of pain and quality of life (QOL) from the baseline were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The mean age of 149 children (amitriptyline 75, placebo 74) was 11.3 ± 3.5 years (79 boys). There was a significant difference in pain improvement in terms of reduction in scores for intensity (3.4 vs 0.9), frequency (3.6 vs 0.6), duration (3.5 vs 0.9), and QOL (2.3 vs 0.9) between amitriptyline and placebo group (P < 0.001 in all). Responders (> 50% reduction) in pain was seen in 76% in amitriptyline compared with 14.9% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, the use of amitriptyline was the only factor predictive of response (odds ratio 24.1, 95% confidence interval: 9.1-64.6, P < 0.001). Minor adverse events were comparable between the groups (25.3% vs 13.5%, respectively, P = 0.07). Eighty-nine percent of children (24/27) who had extended treatment duration (6.8 ± 1.8 months) had pain improvement. After discontinuation of amitriptyline, 70% had sustained response over a mean follow up of 15.84 ± 5.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: A 3-month trial of amitriptyline gives sustained relief of pain in two-thirds of children with FAPD. The safety profile of the drug and its efficacy necessitate more frequent use in the clinical settings.

Antioxidants Supplementation in Acute Amitriptyline Abuse for Pain.

The fundamental aim of this study is to establish the role of antioxidant supplementation in alleviating acute amitriptyline induced oxidative stress. The effect of supplementation was compared on treatment of acute amitriptyline intoxication cases for pain management, with alpha lipoic acid (ALA) alone or with vitamin C, with that of healthy individuals (group I), and those receiving only routine standard treatment (RST) as control (group II). A total of 132 human subjects divided into 5 groups were supplemented with either placebo, RST, RST with vitamin C, RST with ALA, or RST with vitamin C, and ALA. Results of this study revealed that the decrease in the level of oxidative stress and enzyme activity was observed among those supplemented with either alpha lipoic acid alone or along with vitamin C, with a slightly more decrease in the latter group. P value of < 0.001 was considered statistically significant. The percentage of benefit of treatment on supplementation with vitamin C and alpha lipoic acid showed a marked increase in group V cases after supplementation with both in combination. The results provided that the oxidative stress induced by acute amitriptyline poisoning is comparatively decreased by supplementation with antioxidants like alpha lipoic acid and vitamin C, than those only on routine standard treatment.