Fibromyalgia - Treatment

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor -

Treatment of fibromyalgia with antidepressants: a meta-analysis

J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Sep;15(9):659-66

O'Malley PG, Balden E, Tomkins G, Santoro J, Kroenke K, Jackson JL.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a common, poorly understood musculoskeletal pain syndrome with limited therapeutic options. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the efficacy of antidepressants in the treatment of fibromyalgia and examine whether this effect was independent of depression. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of English-language, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Studies were obtained from searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PSYCLIT (1966-1999), the Cochrane Library, unpublished literature, and bibliographies. We performed independent duplicate review of each study for both inclusion and data extraction. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen randomized, placebo-controlled trials were identified, of which 13 were appropriate for data extraction. There were 3 classes of antidepressants evaluated: tricyclics (9 trials), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (3 trials), and S-adenosylmethionine (2 trials). Overall, the quality of the studies was good (mean score 5.6, scale 0-8). The odds ratio for improvement with therapy was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.6 to 6.8). The pooled risk difference for these studies was 0.25 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.34), which calculates to 4 (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.3) individuals needing treatment for 1 patient to experience symptom improvement. When the effect on individual symptoms was combined, antidepressants improved sleep, fatigue, pain, and well-being, but not trigger points. In the 5 studies where there was adequate assessment for an effect independent of depression, only 1 study found a correlation between symptom improvement and depression scores. Outcomes were not affected by class of agent or quality score using meta-regression. CONCLUSION: Antidepressants are efficacious in treating many of the symptoms of fibromyalgia. Patients were more than 4 times as likely to report overall improvement, and reported moderate reductions in individual symptoms, particularly pain. Whether this effect is independent of depression needs further study.

Publication Types:

• Review

Newer treatments for fibromyalgia syndrome

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Dec;4(6):1331-42

Harris RE, Clauw DJ.

Fibromyalgia syndrome is a common chronic pain disorder of unknown etiology. The lack of understanding of the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia has made this condition frustrating for patients and clinicians alike. The most common symptoms of this disorder are chronic widespread pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, difficulty with memory, and morning stiffness. Emerging evidence points towards augmented pain processing within the central nervous system (CNS) as having a primary role in the pathophysiology of this disorder. Currently the two drugs that are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of fibromyalgia are pregabalin and duloxetine. Newer data suggests that milnacipran, a dual norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, may be promising for the treatment of fibromyalgia. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of milnacipran in 125 fibromyalgia patients showed significant improvements relative to placebo. Milnacipran given either once or twice daily at doses up to 200 mg/day was generally well tolerated and yielded significant improvements relative to placebo on measures of pain, patient's global impression of change in their disease state, physical function, and fatigue. Future studies are needed to validate the efficacy of milnacipran in fibromyalgia.

Publication Types:

• Review

Newer treatments for fibromyalgia syndrome

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Dec;4(6):1331-42

Harris RE, Clauw DJ.

Fibromyalgia syndrome is a common chronic pain disorder of unknown etiology. The lack of understanding of the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia has made this condition frustrating for patients and clinicians alike. The most common symptoms of this disorder are chronic widespread pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, difficulty with memory, and morning stiffness. Emerging evidence points towards augmented pain processing within the central nervous system (CNS) as having a primary role in the pathophysiology of this disorder. Currently the two drugs that are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of fibromyalgia are pregabalin and duloxetine. Newer data suggests that milnacipran, a dual norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, may be promising for the treatment of fibromyalgia. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of milnacipran in 125 fibromyalgia patients showed significant improvements relative to placebo. Milnacipran given either once or twice daily at doses up to 200 mg/day was generally well tolerated and yielded significant improvements relative to placebo on measures of pain, patient's global impression of change in their disease state, physical function, and fatigue. Future studies are needed to validate the efficacy of milnacipran in fibromyalgia.

Publication Types:

• Study

The efficacy and safety of milnacipran for treatment of fibromyalgia. a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

J Rheumatol. 2009 Feb;36(2):398-409

Mease PJ, Clauw DJ, Gendreau RM, Rao SG, Kranzler J, Chen W, Palmer RH.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of milnacipran, a dual norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: A 27-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study compared milnacipran 100 and 200 mg/day with placebo in the treatment of 888 patients with FM. Two composite responder definitions were used to classify each patient's individual response to therapy. "FM responders" concurrently satisfied response criteria for improvements in pain (visual analog scale 24-h morning recall), patient global impression of change (PGIC), and physical functioning (SF-36 Physical Component Summary); while "FM pain responders" concurrently satisfied response criteria for improvements in pain and PGIC. RESULTS: At the primary endpoint, after 3-month stable dose treatment, a significantly higher percentage of milnacipran-treated patients met criteria as FM responders versus placebo (milnacipran 200 mg/day, p = 0.017; milnacipran 100 mg/day, p = 0.028). A significantly higher percentage of patients treated with milnacipran 200 mg/day also met criteria as FM pain responders versus placebo (p = 0.032). Significant pain reductions were observed after Week 1 with both milnacipran doses. At 15 weeks, milnacipran 200 mg/day led to significant improvements over placebo in pain (realtime, daily and weekly recall; all measures, p < 0.05), PGIC (p < 0.001), fatigue (p = 0.016), cognition (p = 0.025), and multiple SF-36 domains. Milnacipran was safe and well tolerated by the majority of patients during 27 weeks of treatment; nausea and headache were the most common adverse events. CONCLUSION: Milnacipran is safe and effective for the treatment of multiple symptoms of FM.

Publication Types:

• placebo-controlled trial

Milnacipran for the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults: a 15-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose clinical trial

Clin Ther. 2008 Nov;30(11):1988-2004

Clauw DJ, Mease P, Palmer RH, Gendreau RM, Wang Y.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and clinical studies have suggested that milnacipran, a dual norepinephrine-serotonin reuptake inhibitor, may be efficacious in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM). OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran in treating the multiple domains of FM. METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Adult patients (age 18-70 years) who met 1990 American College of Rheumatology criteria for FM were randomized to receive milnacipran 100 mg/d, milnacipran 200 mg/d, or placebo for 15 weeks. Because this was a pivotal registration trial, the primary end points were chosen to investigate efficacy for 2 potential indications: the treatment of FM and the treatment of FM pain. Thus, the 2 primary efficacy end points were rates of FM composite responders and FM pain composite responders. FM composite responders were defined as patients concurrently experiencing clinically meaningful improvements in the following 3 domain criteria: pain (> or = 30% improvement, as recorded in an electronic diary); patients' global status (a rating of very much improved or much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC] scale); and physical function (a > or = 6-point improvement on the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-36] Physical Component Summary score). FM pain composite responders were defined as those who met the pain and PGIC criteria. Adverse events reported by patients or observed by investigators were recorded throughout the trial. RESULTS: Of 2270 patients screened, 1196 were randomized to receive milnacipran 100 mg/d (n = 399), milnacipran 200 mg/d (n = 396), or placebo (n = 401). The majority of patients were female (96.2%) and white (93.5%). The population had a mean age of 50.2 years, a mean baseline weight of 180.8 pounds, and a mean baseline body mass index of 30.6 kg/m(2). Compared with placebo, significantly greater proportions of milnacipran-treated patients were FM composite responders (100 mg/d: P = 0.01; 200 mg/d: P = 0.02) and FM pain composite responders (100 mg/d: P = 0.03; 200 mg/d: P = 0.004). Milnacipran was associated with significant improvements in pain after 1 week of treatment (100 mg/d: P = 0.004; 200 mg/d: P = 0.04), as well as significant improvements in multiple secondary efficacy end points, including global status (PGIC: P<0.001 for both doses), physical function (SF-36 physical functioning domain-100 mg/d: P < 0.001; 200 mg/d: P = 0.02), and fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory- 100 mg/d: P = 0.04). The most commonly reported adverse events with milnacipran were nausea (100 mg/d, 34.3%; 200 mg/d, 37.6%), headache (18.0% and 17.7%, respectively), and constipation (14.3% and 17.9%). Adverse events resulted in premature study discontinuation in 19.5% and 23.7% of those who received milnacipran 100 and 200 mg/d, respectively, compared with 9.5% of placebo recipients. CONCLUSION: In these adult patients with FM, both doses of milnacipran (100 and 200 mg/d) were associated with significant improvements in pain and other symptoms. Clinical Trials

Publication Types:

• multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose clinical trial

A double-blind, multicenter trial comparing duloxetine with placebo in the treatment of fibromyalgia patients with or without major depressive disorder

Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Sep;50(9):2974-84

Arnold LM, Lu Y, Crofford LJ, Wohlreich M, Detke MJ, Iyengar S, Goldstein DJ.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of duloxetine, a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, in subjects with primary fibromyalgia, with or without current major depressive disorder. METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 18 outpatient research centers in the US. A total of 207 subjects meeting the American College of Rheumatology criteria for primary fibromyalgia were enrolled (89% female, 87% white, mean age 49 years, 38% with current major depressive disorder). After single-blind placebo treatment for 1 week, subjects were randomly assigned to receive duloxetine 60 mg twice a day (n = 104) or placebo (n = 103) for 12 weeks. Co-primary outcome measures were the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score (score range 0-80, with 0 indicating no impact) and FIQ pain score (score range 0-10). Secondary outcome measures included mean tender point pain threshold, number of tender points, FIQ fatigue, tiredness on awakening, and stiffness scores, Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-Severity) scale, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-Improvement) scale, Brief Pain Inventory (short form), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36, Quality of Life in Depression Scale, and Sheehan Disability Scale. RESULTS: Compared with placebo-treated subjects, duloxetine-treated subjects improved significantly more (P = 0.027) on the FIQ total score, with a treatment difference of -5.53 (95% confidence interval -10.43, -0.63), but not significantly more on the FIQ pain score (P = 0.130). Compared with placebo-treated subjects, duloxetine-treated subjects had significantly greater reductions in Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity score (P = 0.008), Brief Pain Inventory average interference from pain score (P = 0.004), number of tender points (P = 0.002), and FIQ stiffness score (P = 0.048), and had significantly greater improvement in mean tender point pain threshold (P = 0.002), CGI-Severity (P = 0.048), PGI-Improvement (P = 0.033), and several quality-of-life measures. Duloxetine treatment improved fibromyalgia symptoms and pain severity regardless of baseline status of major depressive disorder. Compared with placebo-treated female subjects (n = 92), duloxetine-treated female subjects (n = 92) demonstrated significantly greater improvement on most efficacy measures, while duloxetine-treated male subjects (n = 12) failed to improve significantly on any efficacy measure. The treatment effect on significant pain reduction in female subjects was independent of the effect on mood or anxiety. Duloxetine was safely administered and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: In this randomized, controlled, 12-week trial (with a 1-week placebo lead-in phase), duloxetine was an effective and safe treatment for many of the symptoms associated with fibromyalgia in subjects with or without major depressive disorder, particularly for women, who had significant improvement across most outcome measures.

Publication Types:

• double-blind, multicenter trial

Duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia in women: pooled results from two randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials

J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2007 Oct;16(8):1145-56

Arnold LM, Pritchett YL, D'Souza DN, Kajdasz DK, Iyengar S, Wernicke JF.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy (in particular, in pain, functional impairment, and quality of life) and safety and tolerability (incidence of adverse events, discontinuation rates, changes in laboratory findings, and vital signs) of duloxetine in female patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were pooled from two placebo-controlled clinical trials of similar design (randomized, 12-week, and double-blind), comparing duloxetine 60 mg a day (q.d.) or 60 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) (n = 326) with placebo (n = 212), in women who met the American College of Rheumatology criteria for primary fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Compared with the patients receiving placebo, duloxetine-treated female patients demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score and in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score, beginning at week 1 and continuing through week 12 (p < 0.001). Duloxetine was superior to placebo on all efficacy measures, including mean tender point threshold, Clinical Global Impression of Severity, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and average interference from pain scores. The duloxetine-treated group was superior to placebo on all quality of life and functional measures, including each domain of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36). A direct treatment effect of duloxetine on pain reduction was demonstrated and shown to be independent of secondary improvement in mood (based on BPI average pain score). Significantly more duloxetine-treated patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events (296 [90.8%] duloxetine-treated and 165 [77.8%] placebo-treated, p < 0.001). Rates of serious adverse events were similar between duloxetine-treated and placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled results of these studies demonstrate that duloxetine is a safe and efficacious treatment for both the pain and functional impairment associated with fibromyalgia in female patients, while significantly improving quality of life.

Publication Types:

• two randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials

Tricyclic antidepressants and fibromyalgia: what is the mechanism of action?

Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2002 Oct;11(10):1437-45

Lawson K.

Fibromyalgia is a chronic pain disorder of which other clinical features, such as persistent fatigue and disordered sleep, may be a secondary consequence. The initial pharmacological approach to treating the disorder is the management of the pain. Tricyclic antidepressants are the most effective drugs in use so far, especially when administered in combination with other therapies (e.g., selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors), which suggests modulation of the neurotransmitters serotonin and noradrenaline. The effectiveness of amitriptyline and related tricyclic antidepressants, however, is consistent with the involvement of mechanisms, such as potassium channel modulation and NMDA receptor antagonism, in addition to or in place of the modulation of monoamine neurotransmitters. Investigation of the importance of each of the pharmacological properties of amitriptyline and related molecules in the management of fibromyalgia could provide clues for the rational design of new drugs.

Publication Types:

• Review

A double-blind, randomized, controlled study of amitriptyline, nortriptyline and placebo in patients with fibromyalgia. An analysis of outcome measures

Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2001 Nov-Dec;19(6):697-702.

Heymann RE, Helfenstein M, Feldman D.

OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy and tolerability of amitriptyline and nortriptyline in a Brazilian population with fibromyalgia and to evaluate the instruments used to measure the efficacy of the treatment. METHODS: A total of 118 fibromyalgia patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups: amitriptyline (AM, n = 40), nortriptyline (NOR, n =38) and placebo (PL, n = 40), and were blindly given 25 mg at bedtime of the assigned treatment for 8 weeks. Clinical evaluation before and at the end of the study included the number of tender points (NTP), FIQ score (FIQ), and global improvement as reported by the patients on a verbal scale (VSGI). RESULTS: The 3 groups were comparable at baseline for all the parameters studied. After 8 weeks, the 3 groups improved in all parameters: (36.5% AM, 26.7% NOR and 24% PL patients improved on FIQ; 13.9% AM, 19.5% NOR and 8.57% PL patients improved on NTP; 86.5% AM, 72.2% NOR and 57.6% PL patients improved on VSGI). Only the AM group differed from the PL group on VSGI. Side effects were noted among the groups, but none were serious (16 in the AM group, 31 in the NOR group, and 25 in the PL group). CONCLUSION: All three groups improved after treatment. Only the patient's subjective global assessment of improvement differed between the AM patients and the PL group (p < or = 0.03). In fibromyalgia, placebo groups are important in drug trials. Different measures of therapeutic effect are not better than the patient's self assessment.

Publication Types:

• Randomized Controlled Trial

A randomized, double-blind crossover trial of fluoxetine and amitriptyline in the treatment of fibromyalgia

Arthritis Rheum. 1996 Nov;39(11):1852-9

Goldenberg D, Mayskiy M, Mossey C, Ruthazer R, Schmid C.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of fluoxetine (FL) and amitriptyline (AM), alone and in combination, in patients with fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: Nineteen patients with FM completed a randomized, double-blind crossover study, which consisted of 4 6-week trials of FL (20 mg), AM (25 mg), a combination of FL and AM, or placebo. Patients were evaluated on the first and last day of each trial period. Outcome measures included a tender point score, the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scale, and visual analog scales (VAS) for global well-being (1 completed by the physician and 1 by the patient), pain, sleep trouble, fatigue, and feeling refreshed upon awakening. RESULTS: Both FL and AM were associated with significantly improved scores on the FIQ and on the VAS for pain, global well-being, and sleep disturbances. When combined, the 2 treatments worked better than either medication alone. Similar, but nonsignificant, improvement occurred in the BDI scale, the physician global VAS, and the VAS for fatigue and feeling refreshed upon awakening. Trends were less clear for the tender point score. CONCLUSION: Both FL and AM are effective treatments for FM, and they work better in combination than either medication alone.

Publication Types:

• Randomized Controlled Trial

Publication Types:

• Review