Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28919811›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2017

Response to duloxetine in chronic low back pain: exploratory post hoc analysis of a Japanese Phase III randomized study.

Toshinaga Tsuji, Naohiro Itoh, Mitsuhiro Ishida, Toshimitsu Ochiai, Shinichi Konno

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01855919 (Effect of Duloxetine 60 mg Versus Placebo in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain in Japan), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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.

NCT01855919 phase3completednot on this map

Effect of Duloxetine 60 mg Versus Placebo in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain in Japan

TypeinterventionalSponsorEli Lilly and CompanyRan2013 to 2014Enrolled458ConditionsBack Pain Lower Back ChronicArmsDuloxetine, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antidepressants for low back pain and spine-related leg pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Toshinaga TsujiMedical Affairs Department.
Naohiro ItohMedical Affairs Department.
Mitsuhiro IshidaClinical Research Development.
Toshimitsu OchiaiBiostatistics Department, Shionogi & Co. Ltd, Osaka.
Shinichi KonnoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
Health Affairs · USClinical Research Management · USFukushima Medical University · JPShionogi (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDuloxetine is efficacious for chronic low back pain (CLBP). This post hoc analysis of a Japanese randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01855919) assessed whether patients with CLBP with early pain reduction or treatment-related adverse events of special interest (TR-AESIs; nausea, somnolence, constipation) have enhanced responses to duloxetine. PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients (N = 456) with CLBP for ≥6 months and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score of ≥4 were randomized (1:1) to duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo for 14 weeks. Primary outcome was change from baseline in BPI average pain severity score (pain reduction). Subgroup analyses included early pain reduction (≥30%, 10%-30%, or <10% at Week 4) and early TR-AESIs (with or without TR-AESIs by Week 2). Measures included changes from baseline in BPI average pain severity score and BPI Interference scores (quality of life; QOL), and response rate (≥30% or ≥50% pain reduction at Week 14).

resultsPatients with ≥30% early pain reduction (n = 108) or early TR-AESIs (n = 50) had significantly greater improvements in pain and QOL than placebo-treated patients (n = 226), whereas patients with 10%-30% (n = 63) or <10% (n = 48) pain reduction did not; patients without early TR-AESIs (n = 180) had significant improvements in pain at Week 14. Response rates (≥30%/≥50% pain reduction) were 94.4%/82.4%, 66.7%/49.2%, and 25.0%/18.8% for patients with ≥30%, 10%-30%, and <10% early pain reduction, respectively, 74.0%/64.0% for patients with early TR-AESIs, 67.2%/54.4% for patients without early TR-AESIs, and 52.2%/39.4% for placebo.

conclusionEarly pain reduction or TR-AESIs may predict which CLBP patients are most likely to respond to duloxetine with improvements in pain and QOL.

Indexed as

adverse eventsBrief Pain Inventoryduloxetinelow back painquality of liferesponder

Identifiers

PMID28919811
PMCPMC5590685
OpenAlexW2752609486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.