用于成人纤维肌痛的抗精神病药物。

Antipsychotics for fibromyalgia in adults.

作者信息

Walitt Brian, Klose Petra, Üçeyler Nurcan, Phillips Tudor, Häuser Winfried

机构信息

National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA, 20892.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 2;2016(6):CD011804. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011804.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue. It affects approximately 2% of the general population. Up to 70% of patients with fibromyalgia meet the criteria for a depressive or anxiety disorder. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life. Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving health-related quality of life. Antipsychotics might reduce fibromyalgia and associated mental health symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of antipsychotics in fibromyalgia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE and EMBASE to 20 May 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews and two clinical trial registries. We also contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected controlled trials of at least four weeks duration of any formulation of antipsychotics used for the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted the data from all included studies and two review authors independently assessed study risks of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. We derived first tier evidence from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for drop-outs, at least 200 participants in the comparison, eight to 12 weeks duration, parallel design), second tier evidence from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and that we considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison, and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that we considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both. We rated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of four studies with 296 participants.Three studies with 206 participants compared quetiapine, an atypical (second-generation) antipsychotic, with placebo. One study used a cross-over design and two studies a parallel-group design. Study duration was eight or 12 weeks. Quetiapine was used in all studies with a bedtime dosage between 50 and 300 mg/day. All studies had one or more sources of potential major bias and we judged them to be at moderate risk of bias overall. The primary outcomes in this review were participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) much or very much improved, withdrawal due to adverse events (tolerability) and serious adverse events (safety).Second tier evidence indicated that quetiapine was not statistically superior to placebo in the number of participants with a 50% or more pain reduction (very low quality evidence). No study reported data on PGIC. A greater proportion of participants on quetiapine reported a 30% or more pain reduction (risk difference (RD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.23; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 8, 95% CI 5 to 100) (very low quality evidence). A greater proportion of participants on quetiapine reported a clinically relevant improvement of health-related quality of life compared to placebo ( RD 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.31; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3 to 20) (very low quality evidence). Quetiapine was statistically superior to placebo in reducing sleep problems (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.67, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.23), depression (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.04) and anxiety (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.11) (very low quality evidence). Quetiapine was statistically superior to placebo in reducing the risk of withdrawing from the study due to a lack of efficacy (RD -0.14, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.05) (very low quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference between quetiapine and placebo in the proportion of participants withdrawing due to adverse events (tolerability) (very low quality evidence), in the frequency of serious adverse events (safety) (very low quality evidence) and in the proportion of participants reporting dizziness and somnolence as an adverse event (very low quality evidence). In more participants in the quetiapine group a substantial weight gain was noted (RD 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.15; number needed to treat for an additional harm (NNTH) 12, 95% CI 6 to 50) (very low quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels to a very low quality rating because of limitations of study design, indirectness (patients with major medical diseases and mental disorders were excluded) and imprecision (fewer than 400 patients were analysed).One parallel design study with 90 participants compared quetiapine (50 to 300 mg/day flexible at bedtime) to amitriptyline (10 to 75 mg/day flexible at bedtime). The study had three major risks of bias and we judged it to be at moderate risk of bias overall. We downgraded the quality of evidence by two levels to a low quality rating because of indirectness (patients with major medical diseases and mental disorders were excluded) and imprecision (fewer than 400 patients were analysed). Third tier evidence indicated no statistically significant differences between the two drugs. Both drugs did not statistically significantly differ in the reduction of average scores for pain, fatigue, sleep problems, depression, anxiety and for limitations of health-related quality of life and in the proportion of participants reporting dizziness, somnolence and weight gain as a side effect (low quality evidence). Compared to amitriptyline, more participants left the study due to adverse events (low quality evidence). No serious adverse events were reported (low quality evidence).We found no relevant study with other antipsychotics than quetiapine in fibromyalgia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low quality evidence suggests that quetiapine may be considered for a time-limited trial (4 to 12 weeks) to reduce pain, sleep problems, depression and anxiety in fibromyalgia patients with major depression. Potential side effects such as weight gain should be balanced against the potential benefits in shared decision making with the patient.

摘要

背景

本综述是关于用于治疗纤维肌痛药物系列综述之一。纤维肌痛是一种临床定义明确但病因不明的慢性疾病,其特征为慢性广泛性疼痛,常伴有睡眠问题和疲劳。它影响着约2%的普通人群。高达70%的纤维肌痛患者符合抑郁或焦虑障碍的标准。人们常报告残疾程度高且健康相关生活质量差。药物治疗侧重于减轻关键症状和残疾,并改善健康相关生活质量。抗精神病药物可能会减轻纤维肌痛及相关心理健康症状。

目的

评估抗精神病药物治疗成人纤维肌痛的疗效、耐受性和安全性。

检索方法

我们检索了截至2016年5月20日的Cochrane系统评价数据库(CENTRAL,2016年第4期)、MEDLINE和EMBASE,并查阅了检索论文和综述的参考文献列表以及两个临床试验注册库。我们还联系了试验作者。

选择标准

我们选择了使用任何抗精神病药物制剂治疗成人纤维肌痛且持续时间至少四周的对照试验。

数据收集与分析

我们从所有纳入研究中提取数据,两位综述作者独立评估研究的偏倚风险。我们通过讨论解决分歧。我们使用三级证据进行分析。我们从符合当前最佳标准且偏倚风险最小的数据中得出一级证据(结果等同于疼痛强度大幅降低,意向性分析不填补脱落数据,比较组中至少有200名参与者,持续时间为8至12周,平行设计),从未能满足这些标准中的一项或多项且我们认为存在一定偏倚风险但比较组中有足够数量参与者的数据中得出二级证据,从涉及少量参与者且我们认为极有可能存在偏倚或使用临床效用有限结果的数据中得出三级证据,或两者皆有。我们使用推荐分级、评估、制定与评价(GRADE)方法对证据质量进行评级。

主要结果

我们共纳入了四项研究,296名参与者。三项有206名参与者的研究将非典型(第二代)抗精神病药物喹硫平与安慰剂进行了比较。一项研究采用交叉设计,两项研究采用平行组设计。研究持续时间为8周或12周。所有研究中喹硫平的使用剂量为睡前50至300毫克/天。所有研究都有一个或多个潜在的主要偏倚来源,我们总体判断它们存在中度偏倚风险。本综述的主要结局包括参与者报告疼痛缓解50%或更多、患者总体印象变化(PGIC)有很大或非常大改善、因不良事件退出(耐受性)和严重不良事件(安全性)。二级证据表明,在疼痛减轻50%或更多的参与者数量方面,喹硫平在统计学上并不优于安慰剂(极低质量证据)。没有研究报告PGIC的数据。服用喹硫平的参与者中有更大比例报告疼痛减轻30%或更多(风险差(RD)0.12,95%置信区间(CI)0.00至0.23;额外获益所需治疗人数(NNTB)8,95%CI 5至100)(极低质量证据)。与安慰剂相比,服用喹硫平的参与者中有更大比例报告健康相关生活质量有临床相关改善(RD 0.18,95%CI 0.05至0.31;NNTB 5,95%CI 3至20)(极低质量证据)。在减轻睡眠问题(标准化均数差(SMD) -0.67,95%CI -1.10至 -

相似文献

[1]
Antipsychotics for fibromyalgia in adults.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-6-2

[2]
Cannabinoids for fibromyalgia.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-7-18

[4]
Mirtazapine for fibromyalgia in adults.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-8-6

[7]
Sertindole for schizophrenia.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005-7-20

[10]

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索