Background and aims: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) can be a severely disabling side-effect of commonly used cancer chemotherapeutics, requiring cessation or dose reduction, impacting on survival and quality of life. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of research using animal models of CIPN to inform robust experimental design. Methods: We systematically searched 5 online databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Citation Index, Biosis Previews and Embase (September 2012) to identify publications reporting in vivo CIPN modelling. Due to the number of publications and high accrual rate of new studies, we ran an updated search November 2015, using machine-learning and text mining to identify relevant studies. All data were abstracted by two independent reviewers. For each comparison we calculated a standardised mean difference effect size then combined effects in a random effects metaanalysis. The impact of study design factors and reporting of measures to reduce the risk of bias was assessed. We ran power analysis for the most commonly reported behavioural tests. Results: 341 publications were included. The majority (84%) of studies reported using male animals to model CIPN; the most commonly reported strain was Sprague Dawley rat. In modelling experiments, Vincristine was associated with the greatest increase in pain-related behaviour (-3.22 SD [-3.88; -2.56], n=152, p=0). The most commonly reported outcome measure was evoked limb withdrawal to mechanical monofilaments. Pain-related complex behaviours were rarely reported. The number of animals required to obtain 80% power with a significance level of 0.05 varied substantially across behavioural tests. Overall, studies were at moderate risk of bias, with modest reporting of measures to reduce the risk of bias. Conclusions: Here we provide a comprehensive summary of the field of animal models of CIPN and inform robust experimental design by highlighting measures to increase the internal and external validity of studies using animal models of CIPN. Power calculations and other factors, such as clinical relevance, should inform the choice of outcome measure in study design.
Chronic pain strategies must be embedded within broader efforts to tackle deprivation
Introduction Although pain and depression co-exist in 36.5% of cancer patients, the precise nature of the relationship between these symptoms requires elucidation. This study aimed to further understanding of the relationship by determining whether improved pain is associated with a significant reduction in depression and increased quality of life in cancer patients. Methods A secondary data analysis of patients enrolled in pain intervention studies (n=123) was undertaken. Pain, depression and quality of life were measured at baseline and endpoint using the Brief Pain Index (BPI), Hospital and Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) and EuroQol Thermometer assessment tools respectively. The Mann-Whitney U-test and Fisher's Exact Test were used to statistically analyse score differences between pain response groups. Results Baseline BPI, HADS and EuroQol scores were well matched between the groups. Patients responding to pain interventions had an average 2.95 point decrease in endpoint HADS scores, contrasting with a 0.89 increase in non-responding patients (score range 0–42). There was a statically significant difference in the endpoint total HADS scores between the two groups (p=0.0015). Similar mean changes in EuroQol scores revealed increased quality of life scores occurring in patients with (10.64) and without (12.41) improved pain. Conclusions Improving pain results in reduced depression scores. This supports a unidirectional relationship between pain and depression. Further study is required to establish the presence of a bidirectional relationship. Understanding the relationship between pain and depression allows prioritisation of targeted management of co-existent pain and depression, which may improve the clinical care of cancer patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.