Literature DB >> 25892656

Assay sensitivity of pain intensity versus pain relief in acute pain clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and meta-analysis.

Neil Singla1, Matthew Hunsinger2, Phoebe D Chang3, Michael P McDermott4, Amit K Chowdhry4, Paul J Desjardins5, Dennis C Turk6, Robert H Dworkin7.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The magnitude of the effect size of an analgesic intervention can be influenced by several factors, including research design. A key design component is the choice of the primary endpoint. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the assay sensitivity of 2 efficacy paradigms: pain intensity (calculated using summed pain intensity difference [SPID]) and pain relief (calculated using total pain relief [TOTPAR]). A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify acute pain studies that calculated both SPIDs and TOTPARs within the same study. Studies were included in this review if they were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled investigations involving medications for postsurgical acute pain and if enough data were provided to calculate TOTPAR and SPID standardized effect sizes. Based on a meta-analysis of 45 studies, the mean standardized effect size for TOTPAR (1.13) was .11 higher than that for SPID (1.02; P = .01). Mixed-effects meta-regression analyses found no significant associations between the TOTPAR - SPID difference in standardized effect size and trial design characteristics. Results from this review suggest that for acute pain studies, utilizing TOTPAR to assess pain relief may be more sensitive to treatment effects than utilizing SPID to assess pain intensity. PERSPECTIVE: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that TOTPAR may be more sensitive to treatment effects than SPIDs are in analgesic trials examining acute pain. We found that standardized effect sizes were higher for TOTPAR compared to SPIDs.
Copyright © 2015 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute pain; methodology; pain intensity; pain relief; postoperative pain; summed pain intensity difference; total pain relief

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25892656     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.03.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  9 in total

Review 1.  Breaking barriers to novel analgesic drug development.

Authors:  Ajay S Yekkirala; David P Roberson; Bruce P Bean; Clifford J Woolf
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 2.  Essential statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments.

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Scott R Evans; Omar Mbowe; Michael P McDermott
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2020-12-18

3.  Preoperative Education for Less Outpatient Pain after Surgery (PELOPS trial) in orthopedic patients-study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mikhail Dziadzko; Axelle Bouteleux; Raphael Minjard; Jack Harich; Fanny Joubert; Pierre Pradat; Solene Pantel; Frederic Aubrun
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 2.728

4.  Fulranumab in Patients With Pain Associated With Postherpetic Neuralgia and Postraumatic Neuropathy: Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability Results From a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase-2 Study.

Authors:  Hao Wang; Gary Romano; Margaret Fedgchin; Lucille Russell; Panna Sanga; Kathleen M Kelly; Mary Ellen Frustaci; John Thipphawong
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.442

5.  Randomised, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of VVZ-149 injections for postoperative pain following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Srdjan S Nedeljkovic; Darin J Correll; Xiaodong Bao; Natacha Zamor; Jose L Zeballos; Yi Zhang; Mark J Young; Johanna Ledley; Jessica Sorace; Kristen Eng; Carlyle P Hamsher; Rajivan Maniam; Jonathan W Chin; Becky Tsui; Sunyoung Cho; Doo H Lee
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Efficacy and safety of a triple active sore throat lozenge in the treatment of patients with acute pharyngitis: Results of a multi-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trial (DoriPha).

Authors:  Jürgen Palm; Katharina Fuchs; Holger Stammer; Anne Schumacher-Stimpfl; Jens Milde
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Human-like cutaneous neuropathologies associated with a porcine model of peripheral neuritis: A translational platform for neuropathic pain.

Authors:  Frank L Rice; David Castel; Elizabeth Ruggiero; Marilyn Dockum; George Houk; Itai Sabbag; Phillip J Albrecht; Sigal Meilin
Journal:  Neurobiol Pain       Date:  2018-07-20

8.  Current methods and challenges for acute pain clinical trials.

Authors:  Ian Gilron; Daniel B Carr; Paul J Desjardins; Henrik Kehlet
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2018-04-02

9.  John D. Loeser Award Lecture: Size does matter, but it isn't everything: the challenge of modest treatment effects in chronic pain clinical trials.

Authors:  Shannon M Smith; Maurizio Fava; Mark P Jensen; Omar B Mbowe; Michael P McDermott; Dennis C Turk; Robert H Dworkin
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 7.926

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.