@article{PetzkeKloseWelschetal.2020, author = {Petzke, Frank and Klose, Petra and Welsch, Patrick and Sommer, Claudia and H{\"a}user, Winfried}, title = {Opioids for chronic low back pain: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in randomized placebo-controlled studies of at least 4 weeks of double-blind duration}, series = {European Journal of Pain}, volume = {24}, journal = {European Journal of Pain}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1002/ejp.1519}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-218498}, pages = {497 -- 517}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background and Objective This updated systematic review evaluated the efficacy, tolerability and safety of opioids compared to placebo in non-malignant chronic low back pain. Databases and Data Treatment Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were searched from October 2013 to May 2019. Randomized controlled trials comparing opioids with placebo and at least 4 weeks of double-blinded duration were analysed. Primary outcomes were pain relief of 50\% or greater, disability, tolerability and safety. Effects were summarized by a random effects model using risk differences or standardized mean differences. We added nine new studies with 2,980 participants for a total of 21 studies with 7,650 participants. Study duration ranged between 4 and 15 weeks. Studies with a parallel and cross-over design: Based on very low to low-quality evidence, opioids provided no clinically relevant pain relief of 50\% or greater, but a clinically relevant reduction of disability compared to placebo. Enriched enrolment randomized withdrawal (EERW) design: Based on very low to low-quality evidence, opioids provided a clinically relevant pain relief of 50\% or greater, but not a clinically relevant reduction of disability compared to placebo. There was no clinically relevant harm with regard to serious adverse events by opioids compared to placebo in studies with parallel/cross-over and EERW design. There was a relevant harm with regard to drop out rates due to adverse events in studies with parallel/cross-over, but not in studies with EERW design. Conclusions Opioids may provide a safe and clinically relevant pain relief for 4-15 weeks in highly selected patients. Significance Within the context of randomized controlled trials of 4-15 weeks, opioids provided a clinically relevant pain relief of 30\% or greater and a clinically relevant reduction of disability compared to placebo in non-malignant chronic low back pain. Number needed to treat for an additional drop out due to side effects was 11 (95\% confidence interval: 6-33). Assessment of abuse and addiction was incomplete. The frequency of serious adverse events including deaths did not differ from placebo.}, language = {en} } @article{SommerKloseWelschetal.2020, author = {Sommer, Claudia and Klose, Petra and Welsch, Patrick and Petzke, Frank and H{\"a}user, Winfried}, title = {Opioids for chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in randomized placebo-controlled studies of at least 4 weeks duration}, series = {European Journal of Pain}, volume = {24}, journal = {European Journal of Pain}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1002/ejp.1494}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-218487}, pages = {3 -- 18}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background and Objective This updated systematic review evaluated the efficacy, tolerability and safety of opioids compared to placebo in chronic non-cancer neuropathic pain. Databases and Data Treatment Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL, PubMed and PsycINFO were searched from October 2013 to June 2019. Randomized controlled trials comparing opioids with placebo and at least 4 weeks double-blinded duration were analysed. Primary outcomes were pain relief of 50\% or greater, disability, tolerability and safety. Effects were summarized by a random effects model using risk differences (RD) or standardized mean differences (SMD). We added four new studies with 662 participants for a total of 16 included studies with 2,199 participants. Study duration ranged between 4 and 12 weeks. Studies with a parallel and cross-over design: Based on low to moderate quality evidence, opioids (buprenorphine, hydromorphone, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol) provided a clinically relevant pain relief of 50\% or greater and reduction of disability compared to placebo. There was no clinically relevant harm with regards to the drop out rate due to adverse and serious adverse events by opioids compared to placebo. Enriched enrolment randomized withdrawal design: Based on low to moderate quality evidence, tapentadol provided a clinically relevant pain relief of 50\% or greater and reduction of disability compared to placebo in diabetic polyneuropathy. There was no clinically relevant harm with regards to the drop out rate due to adverse and serious adverse events by tapentadol compared to placebo. Conclusions Some opioids provided a short-term substantial pain relief in highly selected patients in some neuropathic pain syndromes. Significance Some opioids (buprenorphine, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol, tapentadol) provide substantial pain relief compared to placebo in postherpetic neuralgia and peripheral neuropathies of different aetiologies for 4-12 weeks. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that these drugs are effective in other neuropathic pain conditions. The safety of opioids with regards to abuse and deaths in the studies analysed cannot be extrapolated to routine clinical care.}, language = {en} } @article{AblinFitzcharlesBuskilaetal.2013, author = {Ablin, Jacob and Fitzcharles, Mary-Ann and Buskila, Dan and Shir, Yoram and Sommer, Claudia and H{\"a}user, Winfried}, title = {Treatment of Fibromyalgia Syndrome: Recommendations of Recent Evidence-Based Interdisciplinary Guidelines with Special Emphasis on Complementary and Alternative Therapies}, series = {Evidence-Bayed Complementary and Alternative Medicine}, journal = {Evidence-Bayed Complementary and Alternative Medicine}, issn = {1741-427X}, doi = {10.1155/2013/485272}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122235}, pages = {485272}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Objective. Current evidence indicates that there is no single ideal treatment for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). First choice treatment options remain debatable, especially concerning the importance of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments. Methods. Three evidence-based interdisciplinary guidelines on FMS in Canada, Germany, and Israel were compared for their first choice and CAM-recommendations. Results. All three guidelines emphasized a patient-tailored approach according to the key symptoms. Aerobic exercise, cognitive behavioral therapy, and multicomponent therapy were first choice treatments. The guidelines differed in the grade of recommendation for drug treatment. Anticonvulsants (gabapentin, pregabalin) and serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (duloxetine, milnacipran) were strongly recommended by the Canadian and the Israeli guidelines. These drugs received only a weak recommendation by the German guideline. In consideration of CAM-treatments, acupuncture, hypnosis/guided imagery, and Tai Chi were recommended by the German and Israeli guidelines. The Canadian guidelines did not recommend any CAM therapy. Discussion. Recent evidence-based interdisciplinary guidelines concur on the importance of treatment tailored to the individual patient and further emphasize the need of self-management strategies (exercise, and psychological techniques).}, language = {en} } @article{HaeuserWalittFitzcharlesetal.2014, author = {H{\"a}user, Winfried and Walitt, Brian and Fitzcharles, Mary-Ann and Sommer, Claudia}, title = {Review of pharmacological therapies in fibromyalgia syndrome}, series = {Arthritis Research \& Therapy}, volume = {16}, journal = {Arthritis Research \& Therapy}, number = {201}, issn = {1465-9913}, doi = {10.1186/ar4441}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-121598}, year = {2014}, abstract = {This review addresses the current status of drug therapy for the management of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) and is based on interdisciplinary FMS management guidelines, meta-analyses of drug trial data, and observational studies. In the absence of a single gold-standard medication, patients are treated with a variety of drugs from different categories, often with limited evidence. Drug therapy is not mandatory for the management of FMS. Pregabalin, duloxetine, milnacipran, and amitriptyline are the current first-line prescribed agents but have had a mostly modest effect. With only a minority of patients expected to experience substantial benefit, most will discontinue therapy because of either a lack of efficacy or tolerability problems. Many drug treatments have undergone limited study and have had negative results. It is unlikely that these failed pilot trials will undergo future study. However, medications, though imperfect, will continue to be a component of treatment strategy for these patients. Both the potential for medication therapy to relieve symptoms and the potential to cause harm should be carefully considered in their administration.}, language = {en} } @article{UeceylerHaeuserSommer2011, author = {{\"U}ceyler, Nurcan and H{\"a}user, Winfried and Sommer, Claudia}, title = {Systematic review with meta-analysis: Cytokines in fibromyalgia syndrome}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-69189}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Background: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on cytokine levels in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Methods: Through December 2010 we systematically reviewed the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO and screened the reference lists of 22 review articles for suitable original articles. Original articles investigating cytokines in patients with FMS were included. Data were extracted by two independent authors. Differences of the cytokine levels of FMS patients and controls were summarized by standardized mean differences (SMD) using a random effects model. Study quality was assessed applying methodological scores: modified Center of Evidence Based Medicine, Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale, and W{\"u}rzburg Methodological Quality Score. Results: Twenty-five articles were included investigating 1255 FMS patients and 800 healthy controls. Data of 13/25 studies entered meta-analysis. The overall methodological quality of studies was low. The results of the majority of studies were not comparable because methods, investigated material, and investigated target cytokines differed. Systematic review of the selected 25 articles revealed that FMS patients had higher serum levels of interleukin (IL)-1 receptor antagonist, IL-6, and IL-8, and higher plasma levels of IL-8. Meta-analysis of eligible studies showed that FMS patients had higher plasma IL-6 levels compared to controls (SMD = -0.34 [-0.64, -0.03] 95\% CI; p = 0.03). The majority of investigated cytokines were not different between patients and controls. Conclusions: The pathophysiological role of cytokines in FMS is still unclear. Studies of higher quality and with higher numbers of subjects are needed.}, subject = {Fibromyalgie}, language = {en} }