Zonisamide for neuropathic pain in adults
- PMID: 25879104
- PMCID: PMC6485502
- DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011241.pub2
Zonisamide for neuropathic pain in adults
Abstract
Background: Antiepileptic drugs have been used in pain management since the 1960s; some have shown efficacy in treating different neuropathic pain conditions. The efficacy of zonisamide for the relief of neuropathic pain has not previously been reviewed.
Objectives: To assess the analgesic efficacy and associated adverse events of zonisamide for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (via CRSO), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and two clinical trials databases (ClinicalTrials.gov. and the World Health Organisation Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to 1 August 2014, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews.
Selection criteria: We included randomised, double-blind studies of at least two weeks' duration comparing zonisamide with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles and clinical trial summaries.
Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We considered the evidence using three tiers. First tier evidence derived 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 dropouts; at least 200 participants in the comparison, 8 to 12 weeks duration, parallel design); second tier evidence derived from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison; and third tier evidence derived from data involving small numbers of participants that were considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both.We planned to calculate risk ratio (RR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) and harm (NNH) for one additional event using standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
Main results: We included a single study treating 25 participants (13 zonisamide, 12 placebo) with painful diabetic neuropathy over 12 weeks. No first or second tier evidence was available for any outcome. The small size of the study and potential major bias due to a high proportion of early study withdrawals with zonisamide precluded any conclusions being drawn. There were two serious adverse events (one death) in zonisamide-treated participants, which were apparently not related to treatment.
Authors' conclusions: The review found a lack of evidence suggesting that zonisamide provides pain relief in any neuropathic pain condition. Effective medicines with much greater supportive evidence are available.
Conflict of interest statement
SD has no conflicts relating to this review or any similar product. ML has no conflicts relating to this review or any similar product. PW has no conflicts relating to this review or any similar product. RAM has no conflicts relating to this review or any similar product. For transparency we have received research support from charities, government, and industry sources at various times, but none relate to this review. We are funded by the NIHR for work on a series of reviews informing the unmet need of chronic pain and providing the evidence for treatments of pain.
Update of
References
References to studies included in this review
Additional references
Apkarian 2011
AUREF 2012
-
- Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group. PaPaS Author and Referee Guidance. http://papas.cochrane.org/papas‐documents (accessed 1 August 2014) 2012.
Baron 2010
Baron 2012
Bektas 2014
Bouhassira 2008
Brodie 2012
Derry 2012
Derry 2013
Derry 2014
Dworkin 2008
Gustorff 2008
Hall 2008
Hasegawa 2004
Higgins 2011
-
- Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Jadad 1996
Jensen 2011
Kalso 2013
Katusic 1991
-
- Katusic S, Williams DB, Beard CM, Bergstralh EJ, Kurland LT. Epidemiology and clinical features of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia and glossopharyngeal neuralgia: similarities and differences, Rochester, Minnesota, 1945‐1984. Neuroepidemiology 1991;10(5‐6):276‐81. - PubMed
Koopman 2009
Krusz 2003
L'Abbé 1987
-
- L'Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K. Meta‐analysis in clinical research. Annals of Internal Medicine 1987;107:224‐33. - PubMed
Lunn 2014
McQuay 1998
-
- McQuay H, Moore R. An Evidence‐based Resource for Pain Relief. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. [ISBN: 0‐19‐263048‐2]
McQuay 2007
-
- McQuay HJ, Smith LA, Moore RA. Chronic pain. In: Stevens A, Raftery J, Mant J, Simpson S editor(s). Health Care Needs Assessment. 3rd Edition. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing, 2007. [ISBN: 978‐1‐84619‐063‐6]
Mohammadianinejad 2011
Moisset 2007
Moore 1998
Moore 2008
-
- Moore RA, Barden J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Managing potential publication bias. In: McQuay HJ, Kalso E, Moore RA editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Pain Research: Methodology Refined. Seattle: IASP Press, 2008:15‐24. [ISBN: 978–0–931092–69–5]
Moore 2009
Moore 2010a
Moore 2010b
Moore 2010c
-
- Moore RA, Moore OA, Derry S, Peloso PM, Gammaitoni AR, Wang H. Responder analysis for pain relief and numbers needed to treat in a meta‐analysis of etoricoxib osteoarthritis trials: bridging a gap between clinical trials and clinical practice. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2010;69(2):374‐9. [DOI: 10.1136/ard.2009.107805] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Moore 2010d
Moore 2010e
Moore 2011a
-
- Moore RA, Straube S, Paine J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Minimum efficacy criteria for comparisons between treatments using individual patient meta‐analysis of acute pain trials: examples of etoricoxib, paracetamol, ibuprofen, and ibuprofen/paracetamol combinations after third molar extraction. Pain 2011;152(5):982‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.030] - DOI - PubMed
Moore 2011b
Moore 2012a
Moore 2012b
Moore 2013a
Moore 2013b
Moore 2014a
Moore 2014b
Moore 2014c
NICE 2013
-
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Neuropathic pain – pharmacological management: The pharmacological management of neuropathic pain in adults in non‐specialist settings. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG173 (accessed 1 August 2014) 2013. [www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/13566/64189/64189.pdf ] - PubMed
O'Brien 2010
O'Connor 2009
Rappaport 1994
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
-
- The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Sakaue 2004
-
- Sakaue A, Honda M, Tanabe M, Ono H. Antinociceptive effects of sodium channel‐blocking agents on acute pain in mice. Journal of Pharmacological Sciences 2004;95(2):181‐8. - PubMed
Soni 2013
Straube 2008
-
- Straube S, Derry S, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Enriched enrollment: definition and effects of enrichment and dose in trials of pregabalin and gabapentin in neuropathic pain. A systematic review. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2008;66(2):266‐75. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2008.03200.x] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Straube 2010
Takahashi 2004
Tanabe 2008
-
- Tanabe M, Murakami T, Ono H. Zonisamide suppresses pain symptoms of formalin‐induced inflammatory and streptozotocin‐induced diabetic neuropathy. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2008;107(2):213‐20. - PubMed
Torrance 2006
Tracey 2011
Treede 2008
van Hecke 2014
von Hehn 2012
Vos 2012
-
- Vos T, Flaxman AD, Naghavi M, Lozano R, Michaud C, Ezzati M, et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012;380(9859):2163‐96. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61729-2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
