-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy and safety of six antidepressants and anticonvulsants in painful diabetic neuropathy: a network meta-analysis.
- Neelima Rudroju, Dipika Bansal, Shiva Teja Talakokkula, Kapil Gudala, Debasish Hota, Anil Bhansali, and Babita Ghai.
- Clinical Research Unit, Department of Pharmacy Practice, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, SAS Nagar (Mohali), India; Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
- Pain Physician. 2013 Nov 1;16(6):E705-14.
BackgroundAnticonvulsants and antidepressants are mostly used in management of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). However there are few direct comparisons between drugs of these classes, making evidence-based decision-making in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy difficult.ObjectivesThis study aimed to perform a network meta-analysis and benefit-risk analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of these drugs in PDN treatment.Study DesignComparative effectiveness study.SettingMedical Education and Research facility in India.MethodsA comprehensive data search was done in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase up to August 2012. We then systematically reviewed the studies which compared any of 6 drugs for the management of PDN: amitriptyline, duloxetine, gabapentin, pregabalin, valproate, and venlafaxine or any of their combinations. We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis to rank treatments in terms of efficacy and safety. We chose the number of patients experiencing = 50% reduction in pain and number of patient withdrawals due to adverse events (AE) as primary outcomes for efficacy and safety, respectively. We also performed benefit-risk analysis, taking efficacy outcome as benefit and safety outcome as risk. Analysis was intention-to-treat.ResultsWe included 21 published trials in the analysis. Duloxetine, gabapentin, pregabalin, and venlafaxine were shown to be significantly efficacious compared to placebo with odds ratios (OR) of 2.12, 3.98, 2.78, and 4.43, respectively. Amitriptyline (OR: 7.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.87, 29.05) and duloxetine (OR: 3.26, 95% CI: 1.04, 9.97) caused more withdrawals than gabapentin. The ranking order of efficacy was gabapentin, venlafaxine, pregabalin, duloxetine/gabapentin, duloxetine, amitriptyline, and placebo and the ranking order of safety was placebo, gabapentin, pregabalin, venlafaxine, duloxetine/gabapentin combination, duloxetine, and amitriptyline. Benefit-risk balance favored the order: gabapentin, venlafaxine, pregabalin, duloxetine/gabapentin combination, duloxetine, placebo, and amitriptyline.LimitationsWe could not include valproate in our analysis owing to the lack of studies reporting the dichotomous efficacy and safety outcomes.ConclusionGabapentin was found to be most efficacious and amitriptyline to be least safe among the treatments included in the study. Gabapentin showed most favorable balance between efficacy and safety.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.