Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28779487›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017

Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

Tess E Cooper, Lauren C Heathcote, Jacqui Clinch, Jeffrey I Gold, Richard Howard, Susan M Lord, Neil Schechter, Chantal Wood, Philip J Wiffen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
15.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Antiepileptic drugs for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Opioids for cancer-related pain in children and adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Precision, integrative medicine for pain management in sickle cell disease.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Depression and Pain: Use of Antidepressants.Current neuropharmacology · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

Tess E CooperCochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LE.
Lauren C Heathcote
Jacqui Clinch
Jeffrey I Gold
Richard Howard
Susan M Lord
Neil Schechter
Chantal Wood
Philip J Wiffen
Boston University · USBristol Royal Hospital for Children · GBChildren's Hospital at Westmead · AUGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBHôpital Dupuytren · FRJohn Hunter Children's Hospital · AUStanford University · USThame Community Hospital · GBUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

Department of Health 13/89/29
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Antidepressants have been used in adults for pain relief and pain management since the 1970s. The clinical impression from extended use over many years is that antidepressants are useful for some neuropathic pain symptoms, and that effects on pain relief are divorced and different from effects on depression; for example, the effects of tricyclic antidepressants on pain may occur at different, and often lower, doses than those on depression. Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used drugs for treating neuropathic pain in the UK.

objectivesTo assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antidepressants used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antidepressant with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN

resultsWe included four studies with a total of 272 participants (6 to 18 years of age) who had either chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, or functional dyspepsia. All of the studies were small. One study investigated amitriptyline versus gabapentin (34 participants), two studies investigated amitriptyline versus placebo (123 participants), and one study investigated citalopram versus placebo (115 participants). Due to a lack of available data we were unable to complete any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the four included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation and allocation concealment (low to unclear risk); blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors (low to unclear risk); reporting of results (low to unclear risk); and size of the study populations (high risk). We judged the remaining domains, attrition and other potential sources of bias, as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesNo studies reported our primary outcomes of participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater or 50% or greater (very low-quality evidence).No studies reported on Patient Global Impression of Change (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low because there was no evidence to support or refute. Secondary outcomesAll studies measured adverse events, with very few reported (11 out of 272 participants). All but one adverse event occurred in the active treatment groups (amitriptyline, citalopram, and gabapentin). Adverse events in all studies, across active treatment and comparator groups, were considered to be a mild reaction, such as nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, and abdominal discomfort (very low-quality evidence).There were also very few withdrawals due to adverse events, again all but one from the active treatment groups (very low-quality evidence).No serious adverse events were reported across any of the studies (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for these secondary outcomes as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe identified only a small number of studies with small numbers of participants and insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.There is evidence from adult randomised controlled trials that some antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, can provide some pain relief in certain chronic non-cancer pain conditions.There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children or adolescents.

Indexed as

Abdominal PainAdolescentAminesAmitriptylineAnalgesicsAntidepressive AgentsChildChronic PainCitalopramComplex Regional Pain SyndromesCyclohexanecarboxylic AcidsDyspepsiaGabapentingamma-Aminobutyric AcidHumansIrritable Bowel SyndromeAminesAmitriptylineAnalgesicsAntidepressive AgentsCitalopramCyclohexanecarboxylic AcidsGabapentingamma-Aminobutyric AcidPlacebos

Identifiers

PMID28779487
PMCPMC6424378
OpenAlexW2589001449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.