Predicting Responses to Pregabalin for Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Based on Trajectory-Focused Patient Profiles Derived from the First 4 Weeks of Treatment

Roger A Edwards, Gianluca Bonfanti, Roberto Grugni, Luigi Manca, Bruce Parsons, Joe Alexander, Roger A Edwards, Gianluca Bonfanti, Roberto Grugni, Luigi Manca, Bruce Parsons, Joe Alexander

Abstract

Introduction: Prediction of final clinical outcomes based on early weeks of treatment can enable more effective patient care for chronic pain. Our goal was to predict, with at least 90% accuracy, 12- to 13-week outcomes for pregabalin-treated painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN) patients based on 4 weeks of pain and pain-related sleep interference data.

Methods: We utilized active treatment data from six placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (n = 939) designed to evaluate efficacy of pregabalin for reducing pain in patients with pDPN. We implemented a three-step, trajectory-focused analytics approach based upon patient responses collected during the first 4 weeks using monotonicity, path length, frequency domain (FD), and k-nearest neighbor (kNN) methods. The first two steps were based on combinations of baseline pain, pain at 4 weeks, weekly monotonicity and path length during the first 4 weeks, and assignment of patients to one of four responder groups (based on presence/absence of 50% or 30% reduction from baseline pain at 4 and at 12/13 weeks). The third step included agreement between prediction of logistic regression of daily FD amplitudes and assignment made from kNN analyses.

Results: Step 1 correctly assigned 520/939 patients from the six studies to a responder group using a 3-metric combination approach based on unique assignment to a 50% responder group. Step 2 (applied to the remaining 419 patients) predicted an additional 121 patients, using a blend of 50% and 30% responder thresholds. Step 3 (using a combination of FD and kNN analyses) predicted 204 of the remaining 298 patients using the 50% responder threshold. Our approach correctly predicted 90.0% of all patients.

Conclusion: By correctly predicting 12- to 13-week responder outcomes with 90% accuracy based on responses from the first month of treatment, we demonstrated the value of trajectory measures in predicting pDPN patient response to pregabalin.

Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov identifiers, NCT00156078/NCT00159679/NCT00143156/NCT00553475.

Funding: Pfizer. Plain language summary available for this article.

Keywords: Frequency domain; K-nearest neighbor (kNN); Monotonicity; Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN); Pregabalin; Trajectory prediction.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of steps for prediction of responder status at 12 or 13 weeks. FD frequency domain, kNN k-nearest neighbor, Pain0 pain at week 0, Pain4 pain at week 4, PMono4 monotonicity of weekly pain from week 0 to week 4, PPL4 path length of weekly pain from week 0 to week 4, 30 PRS4 pain responder status at 30% at week 4, PRSI0 pain-related sleep interference at week 0, PRSIPL4 path length of weekly sleep interference from week 0 to week 4, 30 PRSIRS4 pain-related sleep interference responder status of 30% at week 4, 50 PRSIRS4 pain-related sleep interference responder status of 50% at week 4. The specific actions associated with the steps in the flow chart are shown below: (1) Collect two data elements at baseline and weekly until week 4 so that four data points exist for each patient: Pain on 0–10 NRS and pain-related sleep interference on 0–10 NRS. (2) Calculate monotonicity for the first 4 weeks (see Supplemental File 1). (3) Calculate path length for the first 4 weeks (see Supplemental File 2). (4) Generate the following four combinations of three of the data elements generated in the prior three actions: (a) 4-week monotonicity, 4-week path length, pain score at week 4 (PMono4-PPL4-Pain4), (b) 4-week monotonicity, 4-week path length, pain score at baseline (PMono4-PPL4-Pain0), (c) 4-week monotonicity, pain score at week 4, pain score at baseline (PMono4-Pain4-Pain0), and (d) 4-week path length, pain score at week 4, pain score at baseline (PPL4-Pain4-Pain0). (5) Check four patterns and see if the pattern aligns with those that are uniquely associated with one of the four responder groups (responders at both week 4 and the final week, non-responders at both week 4 and the final week, responders at week 4 but non-responders at the final week, non-responders at week 4 but responders at the final week). (6) If the pattern aligns, predict patient outcome at the final week (Step 1). (7) If the pattern does not align, move to Step 2a and check whether the pattern aligns with those uniquely associated with one of the four responder groups when the 30% threshold for being a responder in the final week is used. (8) If the pattern aligns with those uniquely associated with one of the four responder groups, then predict the patient’s outcome at the final week (Step 2a). (9) If the pattern does not align, move to Step 2b and check whether  the pattern aligns with those uniquely associated with one of the four responder groups when the 30% threshold is used for being a responder in the final week and in week 4. (10) If the pattern aligns with those uniquely associated with one of the four responder groups, then predict the patient’s outcome at the final week (Step 2b). (11) If the pattern does not align, move to Step 3 and implement the kNN analysis (see Supplemental File 4) by considering the following seven data elements for describing each patient: (a) pain-related sleep interference at baseline, (b) pain score at baseline, (c) 4-week path length of pain-related sleep interference, (d) 4-week path length of pain, (e) pain-related sleep interference responder status at week 4 (30% threshold), (f) pain-related sleep interference responder status at week 4 (50% threshold), (g) pain responder status at week 4 (30% threshold). (12) Identify if there are one or more nearest neighbors; if there is only one neighbor with the same vector values, then use it to predict the patient’s outcome and if there is more than one neighbor with the same value, the majority is selected for the prediction (see Supplemental File 4 for examples). (13) Before selecting the final choice of outcome for Step 3, also implement the FD analysis. For the FD analysis, use 28 days of daily pain score data and follow the steps outlined in Supplemental File 3. (14) Compare the outcomes predicted by the FD analysis with the outcome predicted by the kNN analysis. If the both the FD and kNN analyses assign the patient to the same responder group, select that responder group for the outcome. (15) If the responder group assignment differs between the FD analysis and the kNN analysis, use the responder group based on the one assigned by the FD analysis if the patient was a responder at week 4; use the responder group based on the one assigned by the kNN analysis if the patient was a non-responder at week 4. (16) If daily data are not available, use the kNN analysis alone for Step 3

References

    1. Finnerup NB, Attal N, Haroutounian S, et al. Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:162–173. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70251-0.
    1. Borsook D, Kalso E. Transforming pain medicine: adapting to science and society. Eur J Pain. 2013;17:1109–1125. doi: 10.1002/j.1532-2149.2013.00297.x.
    1. Dansie EJ, Turk DC. Assessment of patients with chronic pain. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111:19–25. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet124.
    1. Stanos S, Brodsky M, Argoff C, et al. Rethinking chronic pain in a primary care setting. Postgrad Med. 2016;128:502–515. doi: 10.1080/00325481.2016.1188319.
    1. Alexander J, Edwards RA, Savoldelli A, et al. Integrating data from randomized controlled trials and observational studies to predict the response to pregabalin in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:113. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0389-2.
    1. Alexander J, Jr, Edwards RA, Manca L, et al. Dose titration of pregabalin in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: simulation based on observational study patients enriched with data from randomized studies. Adv Ther. 2018;35:382–394. doi: 10.1007/s12325-018-0664-6.
    1. Parsons B, Emir B, Knapp L. Examining the tme to improvement of sleep interference with pregabalin in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia. Am J Ther. 2015;22:257–268. doi: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000100.
    1. Vernon M, Brandenburg N, Alvir J, Griesing T, Revicki D. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the daily sleep interference scale among diabetic peripheral neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia patients. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2008;36:54–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.09.016.
    1. Vinik A, Emir B, Parsons B, Cheung R. Prediction of pregabalin-mediated pain response by severity of sleep disturbance in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy and post-herpetic neuralgia. Pain Med. 2014;15:661–670. doi: 10.1111/pme.12310.
    1. Gerhart J, Burns J, Post K, et al. Relationships between sleep quality and pain-related factors for people with chronic low back pain: tests of reciprocal and time of day effects. Ann Behav Med. 2017;51:365–375. doi: 10.1007/s12160-016-9860-2.
    1. Kothari DJ, Davis MC, Yeung EW, Tennen HA. Positive affect and pain: mediators of the within-day relation linking sleep quality to activity interference in fibromyalgia. Pain. 2015;156:540–546. doi: 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460324.18138.0a.
    1. Moscou-Jackson G, Finan PH, Campbell CM, Smyth JM, Haythornthwaite JA. The effect of sleep continuity on pain in adults with sickle cell disease. J Pain. 2015;16:587–593. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.03.010.
    1. Tighe PJ, Le-Wendling LT, Patel A, Zou B, Fillingim RB. Clinically derived early postoperative pain trajectories differ by age, sex, and type of surgery. Pain. 2015;156:609–617. doi: 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460352.07836.0d.
    1. Bromberg M, Connelly M, Anthony KK, Gil KM, Schanberg LE. Prospective mediation models of sleep, pain, and daily function in children with arthritis using ecological momentary assessment. Clin J Pain. 2016;32:471–477. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000298.
    1. Thomazeau J, Rouquette A, Martinez V, et al. Predictive factors of chronic post-surgical pain at 6 months following knee replacement: influence of postoperative pain trajectory and genetics. Pain Physician. 2016;19:E729–E741.
    1. Verkleij SP, Hoekstra T, Rozendaal RM, et al. Defining discriminative pain trajectories in hip osteoarthritis over a 2-year time period. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:1517–1523. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200687.
    1. Shiff NJ, Tupper S, Oen K, et al. Trajectories of pain severity in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children Emphasizing Outcomes cohort. Pain. 2018;159(1):57–66. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001064.
    1. Rzewuska M, Mallen CD, Strauss VY, Belcher J, Peat G. One-year trajectories of depression and anxiety symptoms in older patients presenting in general practice with musculoskeletal pain: a latent class growth analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2015;79:195–201. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2015.05.016.
    1. Page MG, Katz J, Romero Escobar EM, et al. Distinguishing problematic from nonproblematic postsurgical pain: a pain trajectory analysis after total knee arthroplasty. Pain. 2015;156:460–468. doi: 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460327.10515.2d.
    1. Enthoven W, Koes B, Bierma-Zeinstra S, et al. Defining trajectories in older adults with back pain presenting in general practice. Age Ageing. 2016;45:878–883. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afw127.
    1. Dowsey MM, Smith AJ, Choong PFM. Latent class growth analysis predicts long term pain and function trajectories in total knee arthroplasty: a study of 689 patients. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;23:2141–2149. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.07.005.
    1. Althaus A, Arránz Becker O, Neugebauer E. Distinguishing between pain intensity and pain resolution: using acute post-surgical pain trajectories to predict chronic post-surgical pain. Eur J Pain. 2014;18:513–521. doi: 10.1002/j.1532-2149.2013.00385.x.
    1. Baron E, Bass J, Murray SM, Schneider M, Lund C. A systematic review of growth curve mixture modelling literature investigating trajectories of perinatal depressive symptoms and associated risk factors. J Affect Disord. 2017;223:194–208. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.046.
    1. Berlin KS, Williams NA, Parra GR. An introduction to latent variable mixture modeling (part 1): overview and cross-sectional latent class and latent profile analyses. J Pediatr Psychol. 2014;39:174–187. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jst084.
    1. Berlin KS, Parra GR, Williams NA. An introduction to latent variable mixture modeling (part 2): longitudinal latent class growth analysis and growth mixture models. J Pediatr Psychol. 2014;39:188–203. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jst085.
    1. Jung T, Wickrama KAS. An introduction to latent class growth analysis and growth mixture modeling. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2008;2:302–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00054.x.
    1. Pfizer Inc. Lyrica (prescribing information). . Accessed 31 Jan 2017.
    1. Tölle T, Freynhagen R, Versavel M, Trostmann U, Young J., Jr Pregabalin for relief of neuropathic pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: a randomized, double-blind study. Eur J Pain. 2008;12:203–213. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2007.05.003.
    1. Freynhagen R, Strojek K, Griesing T, Whalen E, Balkenohl M. Efficacy of pregabalin in neuropathic pain evaluated in a 12-week, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial of flexible- and fixed-dose regimens. Pain. 2005;115:254–263. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.02.032.
    1. Hoffman D, Sadosky A, Dukes E, Alvir J. How do changes in pain severity levels correspond to changes in health status and function in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy? Pain Headache. 2010;149:194–201.
    1. Arezzo JC, Rosenstock J, Lamoreaux L, Pauer L. Efficacy and safety of pregabalin 600 mg/d for treating painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2008;8:33. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-8-33.
    1. Satoh J, Yagihashi S, Baba M, et al. Efficacy and safety of pregabalin for treating neuropathic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a 14 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Diabet Med. 2011;28:109–116. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03152.x.
    1. . Pregabalin vs placebo in treatment of neuropathic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. . Accessed 29 Aug 2018.
    1. Farrar JT, Young JP, Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
    1. Elliott DF, Rao KR. Fast transforms: algorithms, analyses, applications. New York: Academic; 1982.
    1. Cox DR. The regression analysis of binary sequences. J R Stat Soc. 1958;20:215–220.
    1. Alpaydin E. Introduction to machine learning. 2. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2010.
    1. Bezdek JC. Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Norwell: Kluwer; 1981.
    1. Parsons B, Emir B, Clair A. Temporal analysis of pain responders and common adverse events: when do these first appear following treatment with pregabalin. J Pain Res. 2015;8:303–309.
    1. Wilt J, Davin S, Scheman J. A multilevel path model analysis of the relations between sleep, pain, and pain catastrophizing in chronic pain rehabilitation patients. Scand J Pain. 2016;10:122–129. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2015.04.028.
    1. Flink I, Linton S, Pain, Sleep and Catastrophizing: The Conceptualization Matters: Comment on Wilt JA et al. A multilevel path model analysis of the relations between sleep, pain, and pain catastrophizing in chronic pain rehabilitation patients. Scand J Pain. 2016;10:119–121. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2015.09.001.
    1. Finan PH, Hessler EE, Amazeen PG, Butner J, Zautra AJ, Tennen H. Oscillations in daily pain prediction accuracy. Nonlinear Dyn Psychol Life Sci. 2010;14:27–46.
    1. Nes AA, Eide H, Kristjansdottir OB, van Dulmen S. Web-based, self-management enhancing interventions with e-diaries and personalized feedback for persons with chronic illness: a tale of three studies. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;93:451–458. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.01.022.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다