Farrar John T, Locke Kenneth T, Clemens J Quentin, Griffith James W, Harte Steven E, Kirkali Ziya, Kreder Karl J, Krieger John N, Lai H Henry, Moldwin Robert M, Mullins Chris, Naliboff Bruce D, Pontari Michel A, Rodríguez Larissa V, Schaeffer Anthony J, Schrepf Andrew, Stephens-Shields Alisa, Sutcliffe Siobhan, Taple Bayley J, Williams David A, Landis J Richard
Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Pain. 2025 May 1;166(5):1179-1190. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003455. Epub 2025 Feb 18.
Pain clinical trials are notoriously complex and often inefficient in demonstrating efficacy, even for known efficacious treatments. A major issue is the difficulty in the a priori identification of specific phenotypes to include in the study population. Recent work has identified the extent of widespread pain as an important determinant of the likelihood of response to therapy, but it has not been tested in clinical trials for the treatment of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS). We explored this hypothesis using data from 3 previously published trials testing treatments for IC/BPS, which suggested modest benefits but did not meet a priori primary outcome statistical significance criteria. Importantly, these studies also collected symptom questionnaire data that allowed us to retrospectively identify participants with and without widespread pain. Analyzing the treatment by the degree of widespread pain revealed a difference in outcome and statistical significance level for each trial. Participants with predominately local pain (ie, limited widespread pain symptoms) responded to therapy targeting local symptoms, whereas those with widespread pain did not. Alternatively, participants with widespread pain beyond their local pelvic pain responded to more centrally acting treatments. Our results suggest that differentiating patients based on widespread vs more localized pain is a key consideration for designing future clinical trials for conditions with variable pain profiles, such as IC/BPS and potentially other pain-based syndromic disorders.
疼痛临床试验极其复杂,即便对于已知有效的治疗方法,在证明疗效方面往往也效率低下。一个主要问题是难以在研究人群中事先确定纳入特定的表型。最近的研究已确定广泛性疼痛的程度是治疗反应可能性的一个重要决定因素,但尚未在间质性膀胱炎/膀胱疼痛综合征(IC/BPS)治疗的临床试验中得到验证。我们利用此前发表的3项测试IC/BPS治疗方法的试验数据对这一假设进行了探究,这些试验显示了一定益处,但未达到事先设定的主要结局统计学显著性标准。重要的是,这些研究还收集了症状问卷数据,这使我们能够回顾性地确定有和没有广泛性疼痛的参与者。根据广泛性疼痛程度分析治疗情况,发现每项试验的结局和统计学显著性水平存在差异。主要为局部疼痛(即广泛性疼痛症状有限)的参与者对针对局部症状的治疗有反应,而有广泛性疼痛的参与者则无反应。或者,除局部盆腔疼痛外还有广泛性疼痛的参与者对作用更于中枢的治疗有反应。我们的结果表明,根据广泛性疼痛与更局限的疼痛来区分患者,是为具有不同疼痛特征的病症(如IC/BPS以及可能的其他基于疼痛的综合征性疾病)设计未来临床试验时的一个关键考虑因素。