A randomized controlled trial of duloxetine in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain

Eli Lilly and Company, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USA.
Neurology (Impact Factor: 8.3). 11/2006; 67(8):1411-20. DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000240225.04000.1a
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) are involved in pain modulation via descending inhibitory pathways in the brain and spinal cord.
To assess the efficacy of duloxetine, a dual reuptake inhibitor of 5-HT and NE, on the reduction of pain severity, as well as secondary outcome measures in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP).
In this double-blind study, patients with DPNP and without comorbid depression were randomly assigned to treatment with duloxetine 60 mg once daily (QD), duloxetine 60 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the weekly mean score of 24-hour average pain severity on the 11-point Likert scale. Secondary measures and health outcome measures were also assessed.
Duloxetine 60 mg QD and 60 mg BID demonstrated improvement in the management of DPNP and showed rapid onset of action, with separation from placebo beginning at week 1 on the 24-hour average pain severity score. For all secondary measures for pain (except allodynia), mean changes showed an advantage of duloxetine over placebo, with no significant difference between 60 mg QD and 60 mg BID. Clinical Global Impression of Severity and Patient's Global Impression of Improvement evaluation demonstrated greater improvement on duloxetine- vs placebo-treated patients. Duloxetine showed no notable interference on diabetic controls, and both doses were safely administered.
This study confirms previous findings that duloxetine at 60 mg QD and 60 mg BID is effective and safe in the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) is a serious complication of major surgery that can impair a patient's quality of life. The development of CPSP is a complex process which involves biologic, psychosocial, and environmental mechanisms that have yet to be fully understood. Currently perioperative pharmacologic interventions aim to suppress and prevent sensitization with the aim of reducing pain and analgesic requirement in acute as well as long-term pain . Despite the detrimental effects of CPSP on patients, the body of literature focused on treatment strategies to reduce CPSP remains limited and continues to be understudied. This article reviews the main pharmacologic candidates for the treatment of CPSP, discusses the future of preventive analgesia, and considers novel strategies to help treat acute post-operative pain and lessen the risk that it becomes chronic. In addition, this article highlights important areas of focus for clinical practice including: multimodal management of CPSP patients, psychological modifiers of the pain experience, and the development of a Transitional Pain Service specifically designed to manage patients at high risk of developing chronic post-surgical pain.
    Drugs 03/2015; 75(4). DOI:10.1007/s40265-015-0365-2 · 4.13 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pain is common in multiple sclerosis (MS). Duloxetine has a potential therapeutic role in treating MS-related pain. Thirty-eight MS patients were randomized 1:1 to receive duloxetine (n = 18) or matched placebo (n = 20). The dosing regimen was 30 mg daily for 1 week, then 60 mg daily for 5 weeks. The primary outcome measure was change in worst pain for week 6 relative to baseline recorded on a daily pain diary. Of 38 randomized patients, 14 (78%) patients randomized to duloxetine and 18 (90%) randomized to placebo completed treatment per protocol. These participants had an average age of 55.5 years, 25% were male, and 66% had relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Baseline characteristics were similar. Discontinuations were due primarily to drug intolerance. Among those who completed treatment, worst pain at 6 weeks was reduced by 29% (±20%) for duloxetine versus 12% (±18%) for placebo (P = .016). Average daily pain at 6 weeks was reduced by 39% (±29%) in the duloxetine group compared to 10% (±18.8%) in the placebo group (P = .002). There were no significant changes (week 6 vs. baseline) or between-group differences for subject global impression, Beck Depression Inventory, 36-item Short Form Health Status Survey (SF-36), or sleep quality score. Fewer patients could tolerate duloxetine compared to placebo. Among patients who completed 6 weeks of treatment, there were significant reductions in average and worst daily pain scores with duloxetine compared to placebo. This study suggests that duloxetine has a direct pain-relieving effect in MS.
    10/2014; 17(2):141208072725004. DOI:10.7224/1537-2073.2014-001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anticipating and controlling drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in older patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropaty (pDPN) presents a significant challenge to providers. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of newly initiated pregabalin or duloxetine treatment on Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) plan pDPN patients' encounters with potential drug-drug interactions, the healthcare cost and utilization consequences of those interactions, and opioid utilization. Study subjects required a pregabalin or duloxetine pharmacy claim between 07/01/2008-06/30/2012 (index event), ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient medical claims with pDPN diagnosis between 01/01/2008-12/31/2012, and ≥12 months pre- and ≥6 post-index enrollment. Propensity score matching was used to balance the pregabalin and duloxetine cohorts on pre-index demographics and comorbidities. Potential DDIs were defined by Micromedex 2.0 and identified by prescription claims. Six-month post-index healthcare utilization (HCU) and costs were calculated using pharmacy and medical claims. No significant differences in pre-index demographics or comorbidities were found between pregabalin subjects (n = 446) and duloxetine subjects (n = 446). Potential DDI prevalence was significantly greater (p < 0.0001) among duoxetine subjects (56.7%) than among pregabalin subjects (2.9%). There were no significant differences in HCU or costs between pregablin subjects with and without a potential DDI. By contrast, duloxetine subjects with a potential DDI had higher mean all-cause costs ($13,908 vs. $9,830; p = 0.001), more subjects with ≥1 inpatient visits (35.6% vs 25.4%; p = 0.02), and more subjects with ≥1 emergency room visits (32.8% vs. 20.7%; p = 0.005) in comparison to duloxetine subjects without a potential DDI. There was a trend toward a difference between pregabalin and duloxetine subjects in their respective pre-versus-post differences in milligrams (mg) of morphine equivalents/30 days used (60.2 mg and 176.9 mg, respectively; p = 0.058). The significantly higher prevalence of potential DDIs and potential cost impact found in pDPN duloxetine users, relative to pregabalin users, underscore the importance of considering DDIs when selecting a treatment.
    BMC Health Services Research 04/2015; 15(1):159. DOI:10.1186/s12913-015-0829-9 · 1.66 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 23, 2014