Pregabalin for the Treatment of Men With Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Department of Urology, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140, USA. Archives of internal medicine
(Impact Factor: 17.33).
09/2010; 170(17):1586-93. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.319
Evidence suggests that the urogenital pain of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) may be neuropathic.
This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted across 10 tertiary care centers in North America to determine whether pregabalin, which has been proved effective in other chronic pain syndromes, is effective in reducing CP/CPPS symptoms. In 2006-2007, 324 men with pelvic pain for at least 3 of the previous 6 months were enrolled in this study. Men were randomly assigned to receive pregabalin or placebo in a 2:1 ratio and were treated for 6 weeks. Pregabalin dosage was increased from 150 to 600 mg/d during the first 4 weeks. The primary outcome was a 6-point decrease in the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total score. Multiple secondary outcomes were assessed.
Of 218 men assigned to receive pregabalin, 103 (47.2%) reported at least a 6-point decrease in the NIH-CPSI total score at 6 weeks compared with 35.8% (38 of 106 men) assigned to receive placebo (P = .07, exact Mantel-Haenszel test, adjusting for clinical sites). Compared with the placebo group, men assigned to receive pregabalin experienced reductions in the NIH-CPSI total score and subscores (P < .05), a higher Global Response Assessment response rate (31.2% and 18.9%; P = .02), and improvement in total McGill Pain Questionnaire score (P = .01). Results for the other outcomes did not differ between groups.
Pregabalin therapy for 6 weeks was not superior to placebo use in the rate of a 6-point decrease (improvement) in the NIH-CPSI total score in men with CP/CPPS.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00371033.
Available from: Larissa Rodriguez
- "In 1998, the Chronic Prostatitis Cohort (CPC) study began to prospectively collect patient data to systematically examine the demographics, clinical characteristics and natural history of CP/CPPS . The NIDDK subsequently initiated the Chronic Prostatitis Collaborative Research Network (CPCRN) which performed clinical trials for CP/CPPS [14-17]. Results from these clinical research studies failed to identify definitive risk factors or generally effective treatments, with the exception of a single study suggesting that myofascial physical therapy might be effective in IC/BPS . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome (UCPPS) may be defined to include interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). The hallmark symptom of UCPPS is chronic pain in the pelvis, urogenital floor, or external genitalia often accompanied by lower urinary tract symptoms. Despite numerous past basic and clinical research studies there is no broadly identifiable organ-specific pathology or understanding of etiology or risk factors for UCPPS, and diagnosis relies primarily on patient reported symptoms. In addition, there are no generally effective therapies. Recent findings have, however, revealed associations between UCPPS and “centralized” chronic pain disorders, suggesting UCPPS may represent a local manifestation of more widespread pathology in some patients. Here, we describe a new and novel effort initiated by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to address the many long standing questions regarding UCPPS, the Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain (MAPP) Research Network. The MAPP Network approaches UCPPS in a systemic manner, in which the interplay between the genitourinary system and other physiological systems is emphasized. The network’s study design expands beyond previous research, which has primarily focused on urologic organs and tissues, to utilize integrated approaches to define patient phenotypes, identify clinically-relevant subgroups, and better understand treated natural history and pathophysiology. Thus, the MAPP Network provides an unprecedented, multi-layered characterization of UCPPS. Knowledge gained is expected to provide important insights into underlying pathophysiology, a foundation for better segmenting patients for future clinical trials, and ultimately translation into improved clinical management. In addition, the MAPP Network’s integrated multi-disciplinary research approach may serve as a model for studies of urologic and non-urologic disorders that have proven refractory to past basic and clinical study.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01098279 “Chronic Pelvic Pain Study of Individuals with Diagnoses or Symptoms of Interstitial Cystitis and/or Chronic Prostatitis (MAPP-EP)”.
Available from: Jordan Dimitrakoff
- "95% CI: −5.7 to −1.2), and ESWT (mean difference: −5.3, 95% CI: −6.9 to −3.7). Glycosaminoglycan (pentosan polysulfate, PPS), NSAIDs,,  and pregabalin did not significantly improve NIH-CPSI total scores, either statistically or clinically. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) has been treated with several different interventions with limited success. This meta-analysis aims to review all trials reporting on therapeutic intervention for CP/CPPS using the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI).
We searched Medline, PubMed, the Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the NIDDK website between 1947 and December 31, 2011 without language or study type restrictions. All RCTs for CP/CPPS lasting at least 6 weeks, with a minimum of 10 participants per arm, and using the NIH-CPSI score, the criterion standard for CP/CPPS, as an outcome measure were included. Data was extracted from each study by two independent reviewers. Gillbraith and I-squared plots were used for heterogeneity testing and Eggers and Peters methods for publication bias. Quality was assessed using a component approach and meta-regression was used to analyze sources of heterogeneity.
Mepartricin, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS), and triple therapy comprised of doxazosin + ibuprofen + thiocolchicoside (DIT) resulted in clinically and statistically significant reduction in NIH-CPSI total score. The same agents and aerobic exercise resulted in clinically and statistically significant NIH-CPSI pain domain score reduction. Acupuncture, DIT, and PTNS were found to produce statistically and clinically significant reductions in the NIH-CPSI voiding domain. A statistically significant placebo effect was found for all outcomes and time analysis showed that efficacy of all treatments increased over time. Alpha-blockers, antibiotics, and combinations of the two failed to show statistically or clinically significant NIH-CPSI reductions.
Results from this meta-analysis reflect our current inability to effectively manage CP/CPPS. Clinicians and researchers must consider placebo effect and treatment efficacy over time and design studies creatively so we can more fully elucidate the etiology and role of therapeutic intervention in CP/CPPS.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: • Our traditional approach to managing the chronic prostatitis (CP) syndromes has not been very successful for many of our patients.
• Our developing understanding of CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) as a heterogeneous syndrome rather than a homogenous disease has allowed us to develop treatment strategies based on individual patient characteristics.
• By considering each patient as a unique individual and tailoring treatments to a specific patient’s clinical ‘phenotype’ we improve our therapeutic outcomes.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.