Effect of variability in the 7-day baseline pain diary on the assay sensitivity of neuropathic pain randomized clinical trials: an ACTTION study
Abstract
The degree of variability in the patient baseline 7-day diary of pain ratings has been hypothesized to have a potential effect on the assay sensitivity of randomized clinical trials of pain therapies. To address this issue, we obtained clinical trial data from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership, and harmonized patient level data from 12 clinical trials (4 gabapentin and 8 pregabalin) in postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Models were developed using exploratory logistic regression to examine the interaction between available baseline factors and treatment (placebo vs active medication) in predicting patient response to therapy (ie, >30% improvement). Our analysis demonstrated an increased likelihood of response in the placebo-treated group for patients with a higher standard deviation in the baseline 7-day diary without affecting the likelihood of a response in the active medication-treated group, confirming our hypothesis. In addition, there was a small but significant age-by-treatment interaction in the PHN model, and small weight-by-treatment interaction in the DPN model. The patient's sex, baseline pain level, and the study protocol had an effect only on the likelihood of response overall. Our results suggest the possibility that, at least in some disease processes, excluding patients with a highly variable baseline 7-day diary has the potential to improve the assay sensitivity of these analgesic clinical trials, although reductions of external validity must be considered when increasing the homogeneity of the investigated sample.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Using diagnostic algorithms and screening tools for neuropathic pain should help reduce diagnostic heterogeneity.
“The use of diagnostic algorithms for neuropathic pain53 and screening tools54 should contribute to reducing diagnostic heterogeneity (Table 4).”
From Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2015) · cites this paper as [54]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 110
- Authors
- Farrar, J. T., Troxel, A. B., Haynes, K., Gilron, I., Kerns, R. D., Katz, N. P., Rappaport, B. A., Rowbotham, M. C., Tierney, A. M., Turk, D. C., & Dworkin, R. H.
- Affiliations
- United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Queen's University (CA)
- Yale University (US)
- Tufts University (US)
- California Pacific Medical Center (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Rochester (US)
- Corresponding author
- Farrar, John T.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2014-08
- Volume
- 155
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1622-1631
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2077993189
- Cited by
- 110
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 4.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Public Health Service (HHSF 223201000078C)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Keywords
- pain variability, assay sensitivity, neuropathic pain, postherpetic neuralgia, diabetic neuropathic pain, gabapentin, pregabalin, placebo response, treatment response prediction, trial exclusion criteria, generalizability
- MeSH terms
- Pregabalin, Gabapentin, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Amines, Analgesics, Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids, Diabetic Neuropathies, Female, gamma-Aminobutyric Acid, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuralgia, Pain Measurement, United States, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Neuralgia, Postherpetic, Self Report
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review