ArticleClinical drug investigation2014
Long-term efficacy of OROS® hydromorphone combined with pregabalin for chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic Approach for Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Systematic Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTreatment for chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain can be complicated by side effects and drug interactions. Combining opioid analgesics and calcium channel modulators may overcome these and improve efficacy. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OROS® hydromorphone combined with pregabalin in patients with chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain.
methodsThis retrospective observational study was conducted on clinical records from patients aged ≥18 years with chronic non-cancer neuropathic [>4 on the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4) scale] pain of ≥6 months duration, with severe intensity [>4 on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS); range 0-10], who attended all visits and had ≥12 months of follow-up at the Tor Vergata University Polyclinic Hospital, from November 2008 to February 2011. Patients received an oral combination of OROS® hydromorphone and pregabalin. Pain was evaluated at each visit (months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12) using the NRS and DN4 scale; Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was administered at months 1, 6, and 12. Dosage and side effects were recorded at each visit.
resultsOf 1,292 patients (32 % men, mean ± SD age 67.6 ± 11.9 years), 1,126 attended all visits. Seventeen percent (n = 224) had purely neuropathic pain. Initial mean dosage was 6.06 ± 2.00 mg/day for OROS® hydromorphone, 113.02 ± 21.94 mg/day for pregabalin. Dosages increased up to month 6, and returned to near initial dosages at month 12 (range 4-120 mg/day for OROS® hydromorphone; 75-600 mg/day for pregabalin). NRS pain scores (mean ± standard deviation) were 7.25 ± 1.34 at baseline and 1.85 ± 1.36 at 12 months (p < 0.0001); DN4 scores were 6.19 ± 1.65 at baseline, reduced to 1.84 ± 1.25 at 12 months (p < 0.0001), reductions of 74.4 and 70.2 %, respectively. More than 90 % of patients had a ≥50 % score reduction on both scales after 12 months. The PGIC scale showed that >75 % of patients felt improvement at 1 month, increasing to 91 % and 93 % at 6 and 12 months. The incidence of side effects was similar between elderly (aged >65 years) and younger subjects; there were no cases of addiction.
conclusionsThe OROS® hydromorphone and pregabalin combination was efficacious for chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain and well tolerated, providing significant pain reduction without the risk of addiction and with a good tolerability profile, regardless of age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.