↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Duloxetine 60 mg for chronic low back pain: post hoc responder analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Duloxetine 60 mg for chronic low back pain: post hoc responder analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s138297
Pubmed ID
Authors

Levent Alev, Shinji Fujikoshi, Aki Yoshikawa, Hiroyuki Enomoto, Mitsuhiro Ishida, Toshinaga Tsuji, Kei Ogawa, Shinichi Konno

Abstract

Duloxetine has demonstrated efficacy in chronic low back pain (CLBP). We examined the predictors of response to duloxetine for CLBP. This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from 4 double-blind, ran-domized, placebo-controlled trials of duloxetine (60 mg/day for 12-14 weeks) in adult patients with CLBP. Primary outcome was proportion of patients with ≥30% reduction in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain ("pain reduction") at 12-14 weeks. The proportion of patients with ≥30% and ≥50% (secondary outcome) pain reduction in duloxetine and placebo groups was compared. Variables for responder analyses were early improvement (≥15% pain reduction at Week 2), sex, age, baseline BPI average pain score, duration of CLBP, and number of painful body sites according to the Michigan Body Map (≥2 vs 1 [isolated CLBP]; 1 trial); relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Compared with placebo (n = 653), a greater proportion of duloxetine-treated patients (n = 642) achieved ≥30% (59.7% vs 47.8%; P < 0.001) and ≥50% pain reduction (48.6% vs 35.1%; P < 0.001). Among duloxetine-treated patients, early improvement was associated with greater likelihood of ≥30% (RR [95% CI], 2.91 [2.30-3.67]) or ≥50% (3.24 [2.44-4.31]) pain reduction. Women were slightly more likely than men to achieve ≥30% (RR [95% CI], 1.14 [1.00-1.30]) or ≥50% (1.17 [0.99-1.38]) pain reduction. Response rates were similar between age, CLBP duration, and baseline BPI average pain score subgroups. Patients with ≥2 painful sites were more likely to respond to duloxetine 60 mg relative to placebo than patients with isolated CLBP (RR, duloxetine vs placebo [95% CI]: ≥30% reduction, ≥2 painful sites 1.40 [1.18-1.66], isolated CLBP 1.07 [0.78-1.48]; ≥50% reduction, ≥2 painful sites 1.51 [1.20-1.89], isolated CLBP 1.23 [0.81-1.88]). Early pain reduction was indicative of overall response. Patients with multiple painful sites had more benefit from duloxetine than patients with isolated CLBP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 15%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 13 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 16 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2017.
All research outputs
#7,755,290
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#783
of 1,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,734
of 315,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#33
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,815 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.