title: Continuing efficacy of milnacipran following long-term treatment in fibromyalgia: a randomized trial.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Previous studies of long-term treatment response in fibromyalgia and other chronic pain states have generally been limited to approximately one year, leaving questions about the longer-term durability of response. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate continuing efficacy of milnacipran by characterizing changes in pain and other fibromyalgia symptoms after discontinuing long-term treatment. The mean length of milnacipran treatment at the time of randomized withdrawal was 36.1 months from initial exposure to milnacipran (range, 17.9 to 54.4 months).
  
  
  METHODS
  After completing a long-term, open-label, lead-in study of milnacipran (which followed varying periods of exposure in previous studies), adult patients with fibromyalgia entered the four-week open-label period of the current study for evaluation of ongoing treatment response. After the four-week period to confirm new baseline status, 151 patients taking milnacipran ≥100 mg/day and reporting ≥50% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores were classified as responders. These responders entered the 12-week, double-blind withdrawal period in which they were randomized 2:1 to continue milnacipran or switched to placebo. The prespecified primary parameter was loss of therapeutic response (LTR), defined as increase in VAS pain score to <30% reduction from pre-milnacipran exposure or worsening of fibromyalgia requiring alternative treatment. Adverse events and vital signs were also monitored.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Time to LTR was shorter in patients randomized to placebo than in patients continuing milnacipran (P < 0.001). Median time to LTR was 56 days with placebo and was not calculable for milnacipran, because less than half of the latter group of patients lost therapeutic response by study end. Additionally, 81% of patients continuing on milnacipran maintained clinically meaningful pain response (≥30% improvement from pre-milnacipran exposure), compared with 58% of patients switched to placebo (sensitivity analysis II; P < 0.001). The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were 58% and 47% for placebo and milnacipran, respectively. Mean decreases in blood pressure and heart rate were found in both groups, with greater decreases for patients switched to placebo.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Continuing efficacy of milnacipran was demonstrated by the loss of effect following withdrawal of treatment in patients who received an average of three years of milnacipran treatment.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01014585.
authors: Daniel J
authors: DJ
authors: Clauw
authors: Philip J
authors: PJ
authors: Mease
authors: Robert H
authors: RH
authors: Palmer
authors: Joel M
authors: JM
authors: Trugman
authors: Yong
authors: Y
authors: Wang
mesh_terms: D018759:Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D003521:Cyclopropanes / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D005356:Fibromyalgia / Q000188:drug therapy*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D000078764:Milnacipran; D010147:Pain Measurement; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D018759:Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; D003521:Cyclopropanes; D000078764:Milnacipran
references: Pain. 2008 Jun;136(3):419-431
references: 18400400
references: Mayo Clin Proc. 2011 May;86(5):457-64
references: 21531887
references: Clin J Pain. 2009 Nov-Dec;25(9):797-807
references: 19851161
references: Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2009 May;35(2):215-32
references: 19647138
references: Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 May;28(5):815-21
references: 22429066
references: JAMA. 2004 Nov 17;292(19):2388-95
references: 15547167
references: J Rheumatol. 1995 Apr;22(4):639-43
references: 7791155
references: Pain Med. 2010 Feb;11(2):180-94
references: 20002596
references: Clin Ther. 2008 Nov;30(11):1988-2004
references: 19108787
references: Am J Med. 2003 May;114(7):537-45
references: 12753877
references: Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(4):R120
references: 19664287
references: Arthritis Res Ther. 2011 Apr 28;13(2):211
references: 21542893
references: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1994 Feb;16(1):93-104
references: 8150893
references: Arthritis Rheum. 1990 Feb;33(2):160-72
references: 2306288
references: J Rheumatol. 2011 Jun;38(6):1113-22
references: 21285161
references: J Clin Rheumatol. 2000 Oct;6(5):250-7
references: 19078481
references: Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Sep;62(9):2745-56
references: 20496365
references: J Rheumatol. 2009 Feb;36(2):398-409
references: 19132781
references: J Rheumatol. 2005 Oct;32(10):1975-85
references: 16206355
references: Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Apr;67(4):536-41
references: 17644548
references: Ann Acad Med Singap. 1994 Mar;23(2):129-38
references: 8080219
references: Clin J Pain. 2013 Dec;29(12):1021-8
references: 23446068
references: J Rheumatol. 1996 Sep;23(9):1617-20
references: 8877934
references: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 May;65(5):786-92
references: 23203795
references: Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2001 Aug;5(4):320-9
references: 11403735
references: Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83
references: 1593914
references: J Pain Res. 2014 Nov 21;7:679-87
references: 25473309
references: Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Jan;38(1):19-28
references: 7818567
references: Ann Pharmacother. 1992 Jan;26(1):128
references: 1606336
references: Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Jun;39(6):454-64
references: 19152958
references: Clin Ther. 2012 May;34(5):1092-102
references: 22503162
references: Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158
references: 11690728
references: Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1998;18(1):13-9
references: 9604730
references: Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2011 Jul 19;7(9):518-27
references: 21769128
references: J Rheumatol. 2008 Mar;35(3):502-14
references: 18278830