Unmet need in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia.

The efficacy of first-line therapeutic agents for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) has been established in randomized, controlled clinical trials. However, pain in PHN is often refractory to treatment. Many of the patients with PHN are elderly, with additional issues of polypharmacy and comorbidity. They experience various types of pain, suggesting that more than 1 pathophysiologic pain mechanism is involved. PHN adversely affects health-related quality of life. Up to this point, no single best treatment has been identified for PHN. Pharmacological treatments for PHN are inadequate, and many patients are undertreated. Suboptimal treatment can be related to intolerable side effects of medications, long titration periods to reach the effective dosage, inadequate dosing, poor compliance with dosing schedules, and low treatment satisfaction. Inadequate therapeutic response leads more than half the patients with PHN treated with either gabapentin or pregabalin to switch to another class of medication, and more than 30% of patients to add on another class of medication. Safety and tolerability are important considerations in therapy, especially in the elderly. Few patients with PHN and physicians are satisfied with the currently available treatments. Thus, the effective management of postherpetic neuralgia remains an ongoing challenge. New and improved treatment options are therefore needed for the effective management of PHN.

Treatment of chronic moderate-to-severe non-malignant pain with polymer-coated extended-release morphine sulfate capsules.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the efficacy and tolerability of polymer-coated extended-release morphine sulfate (P-ERMS)(KADIAN) for the treatment of chronic, moderate-to-severe, non-malignant pain in a community-based outpatient population not satisfactorily relieved with their current therapies. DESIGN: Phase IV, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N = 1428) with chronic, moderate-to-severe, non-malignant pain with visual numeric scale scores >or= 4 (0 = no pain; 10 = worst pain). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to P-ERMS once daily in AM or PM for a 4-week treatment period. Dose increases were allowed; however, switching to twice-daily dosing was reserved until week 2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement from baseline in pain and sleep scales (0-10) (after weeks 2 and 4), quality of life (physical and mental component summary scores of the SF-36v2 Health Survey) (week 4), and patient (weeks 2 and 4) and clinician (week 4) assessments of current therapy (-4 to +4). Patient satisfaction was assessed again 1 month after the study. RESULTS: Approximately 70% of patients completed the study, with 2.4% (n = 34) discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and 9.6% (n = 136) discontinuing due to an adverse event. Improvements were seen in pain and sleep scores, physical and mental component scores of the SF-36v2, and patient and clinician global assessment scores (p < 0.0001, all assessments). Patients attained similar results regardless of AM vs. PM dosing. More than half (55.4%) of patients were maintained on once-daily therapy, with the remainder on a twice-daily regimen, in accordance with the prescribing information. Most adverse events (71.6%) were mild to moderate in severity, the most common being constipation (11.6%) and nausea (9.2%). One-month follow-up indicated continued satisfaction with P-ERMS vs. previous medication (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: P-ERMS was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with chronic, moderate-to-severe, non-malignant pain when used once or twice daily.

A randomized controlled trial of the use of self-help materials in addition to standard general practice treatment of depression compared to standard treatment alone.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to examine whether the addition of a brief individual self-help package to standard primary-care treatment of depression with antidepressants is associated with any additional improvements in clinical outcome. METHOD: Individuals with major depressive disorder who were prescribed an antidepressant were recruited through their general practitioner (GP) and allocated randomly to standard treatment alone or standard treatment plus self-help. Assessments of symptoms, social adjustment, global functioning, satisfaction with treatment and knowledge about the management of the disorder were completed at three time points over 26 weeks. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve individuals agreed to participate and 96 met criteria for inclusion in the randomized controlled trial. Subjects in both treatment conditions improved substantially over the study period; the mean Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) score fell from 27.3 to 13.9 in the intention-to-treat analysis. There were no between group differences in outcome on any of the primary outcome measures, nor did these approach even marginal significance. Patients and GPs were highly satisfied with the self-help programme, and the intervention as compared to the control group reported significantly greater improvements in knowledge about depression and satisfaction with information received about depression. CONCLUSIONS: An individualized self-help package improved perceived knowledge about depression but did not have identifiable effects on outcome when offered to patients treated in primary care. The study was sufficiently well powered to detect relatively small effects.