BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is a common and increasingly prevalent condition that is one of the primary causes of chronic pain. Staying physically active protects against disability from knee OA but is also very challenging. A critical but unexamined question is whether patients at greatest risk for becoming less active are those with a genetic predisposition for greater sensitivity to daily pain. AIMS: We examined day-to-day variability in knee OA pain for patients with different variants of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) and mu-opioid receptor (OPRM1) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and whether patients with a specific genotype experience more pain following daily physical activity. We predicted that patients having one or more copies of the Met158 allele of COMT rs4680 (A-A or A-G) and one or more copies of the Asp40 allele of OPRM1 rs1799971 (A-G or G-G) would show greater pain variability. We expected to see the same pattern for these SNPs with regard to moderation (i.e., exacerbation) of the activity-pain association. METHODS: A total of 120 knee OA patients reported on their pain 3 times per day over 22 days using handheld computers, and wore an accelerometer to capture daily physical activity. Multilevel modeling was used to examine the magnitude of within-person variability in pain by genetic group. We also examined whether lagged, within-patient associations between level of activity in the afternoon (i.e., minutes of moderate intensity activity, and number of steps) and knee pain at the end-of-day were moderated by between-patient differences in genotype. RESULTS: Regarding OPRM1 rs1799971 (Asn40Asp), patients with two copies of the Asn40 allele showed the greatest day-to-day pain variability. Regarding COMT rs4680 (Val158Met), patients with the Val/Val genotype showed the greatest pain variability and also experienced the greatest increase in pain as a result of physical activity. A similar pattern of findings across bi-directional temporal lags was consistent with a negative feedback loop between daily physical activity and pain according to genotype. Consistent with some previous studies, there were no significant between-person differences in daily pain when comparing patients according to COMT rs4680, or OPRM1 rs1799971. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence that patients with certain genotypes for COMT rs4680 and OPRM1 rs1799971 (G-G and A-A, respectively) experience more variability in their day-to-day pain and exacerbation of pain after daily physical activity compared to patients with other genotypes. Our findings should be replicated in larger study populations. IMPLICATIONS: Previous clinical research has focused primarily on differences in average level of pain between patients with and without a specific genotype. Assessment of within-person variability through repeated measurements in daily life enhances the reliability, power, and ecological validity of phenotypic measurement.
BACKGROUND:Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is a common and increasingly prevalent condition that is one of the primary causes of chronic pain. Staying physically active protects against disability from knee OA but is also very challenging. A critical but unexamined question is whether patients at greatest risk for becoming less active are those with a genetic predisposition for greater sensitivity to daily pain. AIMS: We examined day-to-day variability in knee OA pain for patients with different variants of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) and mu-opioid receptor (OPRM1) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and whether patients with a specific genotype experience more pain following daily physical activity. We predicted that patients having one or more copies of the Met158 allele of COMTrs4680 (A-A or A-G) and one or more copies of the Asp40 allele of OPRM1 rs1799971 (A-G or G-G) would show greater pain variability. We expected to see the same pattern for these SNPs with regard to moderation (i.e., exacerbation) of the activity-pain association. METHODS: A total of 120 knee OA patients reported on their pain 3 times per day over 22 days using handheld computers, and wore an accelerometer to capture daily physical activity. Multilevel modeling was used to examine the magnitude of within-person variability in pain by genetic group. We also examined whether lagged, within-patient associations between level of activity in the afternoon (i.e., minutes of moderate intensity activity, and number of steps) and knee pain at the end-of-day were moderated by between-patient differences in genotype. RESULTS: Regarding OPRM1 rs1799971 (Asn40Asp), patients with two copies of the Asn40 allele showed the greatest day-to-day pain variability. Regarding COMTrs4680 (Val158Met), patients with the Val/Val genotype showed the greatest pain variability and also experienced the greatest increase in pain as a result of physical activity. A similar pattern of findings across bi-directional temporal lags was consistent with a negative feedback loop between daily physical activity and pain according to genotype. Consistent with some previous studies, there were no significant between-person differences in daily pain when comparing patients according to COMTrs4680, or OPRM1 rs1799971. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence that patients with certain genotypes for COMTrs4680 and OPRM1 rs1799971 (G-G and A-A, respectively) experience more variability in their day-to-day pain and exacerbation of pain after daily physical activity compared to patients with other genotypes. Our findings should be replicated in larger study populations. IMPLICATIONS: Previous clinical research has focused primarily on differences in average level of pain between patients with and without a specific genotype. Assessment of within-person variability through repeated measurements in daily life enhances the reliability, power, and ecological validity of phenotypic measurement.
Authors: Timothy H Wideman; Patrick H Finan; Robert R Edwards; Phillip J Quartana; Luis F Buenaver; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Michael T Smith Journal: Pain Date: 2013-12-28 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Barbara I Nicholl; Kate L Holliday; Gary J Macfarlane; Wendy Thomson; Kelly A Davies; Terence W O'Neill; Gyorgy Bartfai; Steven Boonen; Felipe Casanueva; Joseph D Finn; Gianni Forti; Aleksander Giwercman; Ilpo T Huhtaniemi; Krzysztof Kula; Margus Punab; Alan J Silman; Dirk Vanderschueren; Frederick C W Wu; John McBeth Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-06-22 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Patrick H Finan; Alex J Zautra; Mary C Davis; Kathryn Lemery-Chalfant; Jonathan Covault; Howard Tennen Journal: Pain Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Stephen P Messier; Richard F Loeser; Gary D Miller; Timothy M Morgan; W Jack Rejeski; Mary Ann Sevick; Walter H Ettinger; Marco Pahor; Jeff D Williamson Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2004-05
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Louise Murphy; Todd A Schwartz; Charles G Helmick; Jordan B Renner; Gail Tudor; Gary Koch; Anca Dragomir; William D Kalsbeek; Gheorghe Luta; Joanne M Jordan Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2008-09-15
Authors: Giovana M Weckwerth; Thiago J Dionísio; Yuri M Costa; Bella L Colombini-Ishiquiriama; Gabriela M Oliveira; Elza A Torres; Leonardo R Bonjardim; Adriana M Calvo; Troy Moore; Devin M Absher; Carlos F Santos Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Emily E Sharpe; Jessica L Booth; Timothy T Houle; Peter H Pan; Lynnette C Harris; Carol A Aschenbrenner; James C Eisenach Journal: Pain Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 7.926