ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Efficacy and safety of low-dose naltrexone (LDN) in fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. 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.
- Low dose naltrexone for fibromyalgia: case series demonstrating pain relief and other health benefits.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by pain and psychological symptoms in adults. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the effectiveness and safety of low-dose naltrexone (LDN) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in variable small settings. Hence the need to conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the overall effect and the strength of evidence. Methodology: PUBMED, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to retrieve RCTs comparing naltrexone with placebo in fibromyalgia patients for systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted pairwise meta-analyses using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model via RevMan 5.4. We reported dichotomous outcomes as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Quality of included RCTs was assessed using revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs (RoB 2.0). Heterogeneity was detected by Chi Results: We included five RCTs in meta-analysis. Our results estimated that LDN is superior to placebo in alleviating pain both in primary (SMD -0.61; 95% CI -1.14, -0.08) and sensitivity analysis (SMD -0.87; 95% CI -1.28, -0.46) but not in raising mechanical pain threshold (SMD 0.24; 95% CI -0.09, 0.56) in fibromyalgia patients. Neither the primary (RR 1.68; 95% CI 0.84, 3.36) nor sensitivity analysis (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.72, 1.34) could associate LDN use with the incidence of headache. The incidence of vivid dreams (RR 2.41; 95% CI 1.77, 3.28) was significantly higher in treatment group as compared to placebo. Conclusion: LDN is considered to be effective in the treatment of fibromyalgia. No serious adverse effects were reported in treatment group. There is need for more RCTs to support the evidence.
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.