Evidence Hub

A systematic review and mixed treatment comparison of the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for fibromyalgia

Choy E, Marshall D, Gabriel ZL, Mitchell SA, Gylee E, Dakin HA

Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism, 2011

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the literature on pharmacological treatments for fibromyalgia.

METHODS: Relative efficacy was estimated in terms of outcome measures highlighted by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Network using a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials reporting treatments for fibromyalgia were identified by systematically reviewing electronic databases (Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE; accessed February 2008) and conducting manual bibliographic searches.

RESULTS: Forty-five randomized controlled trials met the prespecified inclusion criteria for the systematic review. There were limited robust clinical data for some therapeutic classes (tricyclic antidepressants, analgesics, sedative hypnotics, monoamine oxidase inhibitors) and only 21 studies met the more stringent criteria for inclusion in the MTC. The majority of studies included in the MTC assessed the anticonvulsant pregabalin (n = 5) or the serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) duloxetine (n = 3) and milnacipran (n = 3). Licensed doses of pregabalin and duloxetine were significantly (P < 0.05) more efficacious than placebo in terms of absolute reduction in pain, number of "responders" (≥30% reduction in pain), or change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire score (pregabalin 450 mg/d only). There was no significant difference between licensed doses of pregabalin and duloxetine for these outcomes. However licensed doses of pregabalin produced…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free