The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Cytokines, essential mediators of inflammatory and immune responses, play an important role in the pathophysiological processes associated with neuropathic pain following peripheral nerve injury. Recently, a novel proinflammatory cytokine, the interleukin (IL)-17, was found to orchestrate inflammatory responses in a wide range of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases of the nervous system. Here, we investigated the role of IL-17 in mediating neuroinflammation and pain hypersensitivity using the neuropathic pain model of partial ligation of the sciatic nerve in mice. Compared to wild-type, IL-17 knockout (KO) mice displayed significantly decreased mechanical pain hypersensitivity as well as decreased infiltration of T cells and macrophages to the injured sciatic nerves and the L3-L5 dorsal root ganglia and decreased activation of microglia and astrocytes in the L3-5 dorsal and ventral horns of the spinal cord. Further, intraplantar and intraneural injection of recombinant IL-17 into the hind paw and the sciatic nerve, respectively, induced both mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia, whereas intrathecal injection produced thermal hyperalgesia. IL-17 administration was associated with a significant increase in the numbers of infiltrating neutrophils and activated dendritic cells in the injected hind paws and infiltrating neutrophils in the injected sciatic nerves. Taken together, our results demonstrate that IL-17 contributes to the regulation of immune cell infiltration and glial activation after peripheral nerve injury and the ensuing neuropathic pain. ⋯ IL-17 is an important regulator of immune responses and is involved in inducing and mediating proinflammatory reactions. Using IL-17 KO mice, we have demonstrated that IL-17 contributes to neuroinflammatory responses and pain hypersensitivity following neuropathic injury. This work identifies IL-17 as a potential therapeutic target in neuropathic pain.
-
The purpose of this study was to demonstrate a method for increasing the precision and information yield of postoperative pain assessment. We recorded pain intensity ratings over 6 days after surgery in 502 elective surgery patients and examined individual pain trajectories. A linear fit of an individual patient's scores defines a trajectory with two features: (1) the intercept or initial pain intensity; and (2) the slope, or rate of pain resolution. Three pain trajectory patterns emerged from examination of the pain trajectory slopes. Most patients (63% of the sample) demonstrated a negative slope trajectory characterized by a decline in pain intensity over days after surgery. Other patients (25% of the sample) demonstrated a flat trajectory with no meaningful change over 6 days from pain they reported initially. A third patient group (12% of the sample) had a positive slope trajectory in which pain scores increased over 6 days after surgery. Measures derived from individual pain trajectories yielded much lower standard errors of measurement and therefore had better measurement precision than did conventional pain assessment methods. Pain trajectory measures proved sufficiently precise to characterize pain patterns reliably in individual patients. ⋯ Progress in acute pain management requires effective pain assessment. The acute pain trajectory quantifies rate of pain resolution as well as pain intensity. It affords more precise measurement than conventional pain assessment and can identify abnormal postoperative pain resolution.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (Study SB-767905/013) of alvimopan for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction in patients with non-cancer pain.
The balance between the pain relief provided by opioid analgesics and the side effects caused by such agents is of particular significance to patients who take opioids for the long-term relief of non-cancer pain. The spectrum of signs and symptoms affecting the gastrointestinal (GI) tract associated with opioid use is known as opioid-induced bowel dysfunction. Alvimopan is an orally administered, systemically available, peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonist, approved in the US for the management of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing bowel resection (short-term, in-hospital use only). Alvimopan was under clinical development for long-term treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) but this program has been discontinued. This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, part of the former OIC development program, enrolled patients (N = 485) receiving opioids for non-cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive alvimopan .5 mg once daily, alvimopan .5 mg twice daily, or placebo, for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who experienced ≥ 3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs; bowel movements with no laxative use in the previous 24 hours) per week over the treatment period, and an average increase from baseline of ≥ 1 SBM per week. There were greater proportions of SBM responders in both alvimopan treatment groups (63% in both groups) compared with placebo (56%), although these differences were not statistically significant. Secondary efficacy analyses indicated that alvimopan was numerically superior to placebo in improving opioid-induced bowel dysfunction symptoms and patients' global assessment of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction, and reduced the requirement for rescue laxatives. Active treatment was well tolerated and alvimopan did not antagonize opioid analgesia. ⋯ Although the primary endpoint was not met in this study, the magnitude of alvimopan-induced improvements versus baseline, together with previous study results, suggest that a PAM-OR antagonist has the potential to improve OIC.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
A randomized trial of 2 prescription strategies for opioid treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain.
The use of opioid medications for treating chronic noncancer pain is growing; however, there is a lack of good evidence regarding their long-term effectiveness, association with substance abuse, and proper prescribing guidelines. The current study directly compares for the first time in a randomized trial the effectiveness of a conservative, hold the line (Stable Dose) prescribing strategy for opioid medications with a more liberal dose escalation (Escalating Dose) approach. This 2-arm, parallel, randomized pragmatic clinical trial followed 135 patients referred to a specialty pain clinic at a Veterans Affairs Hospital for 12 months (94% male and 74% with musculoskeletal pain). Primary outcomes included monthly or quarterly evaluations of pain severity, pain relief from medications, pain-related functional disability, and opioid misuse behaviors. All subjects received identical pain treatment except for the application of treatment group specific strategies for opioid prescriptions. No group differences were found for primary outcomes of usual pain or functional disability although the Escalating Dose group did show a small but significantly larger increase in self-rated pain relief from medications. About 27% of patients were discharged over the course of the study due to opioid misuse/noncompliance, but there were no group differences in rate of opioid misuse. ⋯ The results of this study demonstrate that even in carefully selected patients there is a significant risk of problematic opioid misuse. Although in general there were no statistically significant differences in the primary outcomes between groups, the escalating dose strategy did lead to small improvements in self-reported acute relief from medications without an increase in opioid misuse, compared to the stable dose strategy.
-
Clinical research often relies on retrospective recall of symptom levels, but the information contained in these ratings is not well understood. The "peak-and-end rule" suggests that the most intense (peak) and final (end) moments of an experience disproportionately influence retrospective judgments, which may bias self-reports of somatic symptoms. This study examined the extent to which peak and end symptom levels systematically affect patients' day-to-day recall of pain and fatigue. Rheumatology patients (N = 97) completed 5 to 6 momentary ratings of pain and fatigue per day as well as a daily recall rating of these symptoms for 28 consecutive days. For pain, peak and end momentary ratings predicted daily recall of average pain beyond the actual average of momentary ratings. This effect was small, yet was confirmed in both between-person and within-person (repeated measures) analyses. For fatigue, neither peak nor end momentary symptoms significantly contributed to daily recall. Of note, the evidence for peak- and end-effects in recall of pain and fatigue varied significantly between individual patients. These findings suggest that peak- and end-effects create a small bias in recall reports of pain, but not fatigue. However, there are considerable individual differences in susceptibility to peak and end heuristics. ⋯ The peak-end cognitive heuristic could bias end-of-day recall of pain and fatigue. An effect was shown for pain, but not for fatigue. The effects were small and were unlikely to substantially bias end-of-day assessments. Individuals were shown to differ in the degree that the heuristic was associated with recall.