Pain
-
The research of new therapeutic strategies for neuropathic pain represents a major current priority. Important drawbacks to advance in the development of these therapies are the limited translational value of the animal models now available and the elucidation of the complex neuronal and immune pathophysiological mechanisms underlying neuropathic pain. One of the neurotransmitter systems participating in neuropathic pain control that has recently raised a particular interest is the endocannabinoid system. ⋯ Several clinical studies suggest that cannabinoids significantly reduced neuropathic pain, although most of these trials fail the required standards of quality. The different pain patient populations included in the systematic reviews also make it difficult to get adequate conclusions. Therefore, additional clinical trials that consider an adequate number of patients, the use active treatments as controls, and longer duration of administration are required to have an adequate profile of the effectiveness and safety of cannabinoids in neuropathic pain.
-
Neuropathic pain affects up to 10% of the general population, but drug treatments recommended for the treatment of neuropathic pain are associated with modest efficacy and/or produce dose-limiting side effects. Hence, neuropathic pain is an unmet medical need. ⋯ One notable exception is the angiotensin II type 2 (AT2) receptor that has clinical validity on the basis of a successful double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial of EMA401, a highly selective, orally active, peripherally restricted AT2 receptor antagonist in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. In this study, we review research to date on target validation, efficacy, and mode of action of small molecule AT2 receptor antagonists in rodent models of peripheral neuropathic pain and in cultured human sensory neurons, the preclinical pharmacokinetics of these compounds, and the outcome of the above clinical trial.
-
Review Historical Article
A comprehensive categorical and bibliometric analysis of published research articles on pediatric pain from 1975-2010.
The field of pediatric pain research began in the mid-1970s and has undergone significant growth and development in recent years as evidenced by the variety of books, conferences, and journals on the topic and also the number of disciplines engaged in work in this area. Using categorical and bibliometric meta-trend analysis, this study offers a synthesis of research on pediatric pain published between 1975 and 2010 in peer-reviewed journals. Abstracts from 4256 articles, retrieved from Web of Science, were coded across 4 categories: article type, article topic, type and age of participants, and pain stimulus. ⋯ Most studies were original research articles; the most frequent topics were pain characterization (39.86%), pain intervention (37.49%), and pain assessment (25.00%). Clinical samples were most frequent, with participants most often characterized as children (6-12 years) or adolescents (13-18 years) experiencing chronic or acute pain. The findings provide a comprehensive overview of contributions in the field of pediatric pain research over 35 years and offers recommendations for future research in the area.
-
Over the last decade, the apparent increase in placebo responses in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of neuropathic pain have complicated and potentially limited development and availability of new effective pain medication. Placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia effects are well described in nociceptive and idiopathic pain conditions, but less is known about the magnitude and mechanisms of placebo and nocebo effects in neuropathic pain. In neuropathic pain, placebo treatments have primarily been used as control conditions for active agents under investigation in RCTs and these placebo responses are typically not controlled for the natural history of pain and other confounding factors. ⋯ Large placebo analgesia but no nocebo hyperalgesic effects have been found, and the underlying mechanisms are beginning to be elucidated. Here we review placebo and nocebo effects and the underlying mechanisms in neuropathic pain and compare them with those of nociceptive and idiopathic pain. This allows for a novel discussion on how knowledge of psychological, neurobiological, and genetic factors underlying well-controlled placebo effects may help improve the information that can be obtained from and potentially restore the utility of RCTs.
-
Brain responses to nociception are well identified. The same is not true for allodynic pain, a strong painful sensation in response to touch or innocuous cold stimuli that may be experienced by patients with neuropathic pain. Brain (or spinal cord) reorganization that may explain this paradoxical perception still remains largely unknown. ⋯ Both thalamic function and structure have been reported to be abnormal or impaired in neuropathic pain conditions including in the basal state, possibly explaining the spontaneous component of neuropathic pain. A further indication as to how the brain can create neuropathic pain response in SII and insular cortices stems from examples of diseases, including single-case reports in whom a focal brain lesion leads to central pain disappearance. Additional studies are required to certify the contribution of these areas to the disease processes, to disentangle abnormalities respectively related to pain and to deafferentation, and, in the future, to guide targeting of stimulation studies.