Calcium channel modulators in the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain：a rapid health technology assessment
- VernacularTitle:钙离子通道调节剂治疗糖尿病周围神经病理性疼痛的快速卫生技术评估
- Author:
Ning GAO
1
;
Bing FENG
1
;
Shengnan GAO
2
;
Ranran ZHANG
1
;
Yuxi ZHANG
1
;
Guoqiang LIU
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Clinical Pharmacy，Hebei Medical University Third Hospital，Shijiazhuang 050051，China
2. Hebei Society for Integrated Drug and Health Technology Assessment，Shijiazhuang 050051，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
calcium channel modulators;
diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain;
efficacy;
safety;
economics;
rapid health
- From:
China Pharmacy
2025;36(8):1001-1007
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy， safety and economics of calcium channel modulators in the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain （DPNP）， and provide evidence-based evidence for clinical drug selection and decision-making. METHODS PubMed， Embase， Cochrane Library， CNKI， Wanfang data， VIP net， CBM and official websites of foreign health technology assessment （HTA） institutions were systematically searched to collect HTA reports， systematic review/meta-analyses， and pharmacoeconomic studies of pregabalin， gabapentin， crisugabalin， and mirogabalin for the treatment of DPNP. The timeframe for all searches was from the inception to June 2024. After data extraction and quality assessment， the results of the included studies were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS A total of 16 articles were included， involving 1 HTA report， 7 systematic reviews/meta- analyses， and 8 pharmacoeconomic studies. No studies on crisugabalin were retrieved. Compared with placebo， both pregabalin and mirogabalin reduced end point pain scores and increased the proportion of patients with ≥30% and/or ≥50% reduction in pain scores. Pregabalin also improved patient global impression of change （PGIC）. Gabapentin was similar to placebo in reducing end point pain scores and increasing the proportion of patients with ≥30% and/or ≥50% reduction in pain scores， but gabapentin improved PGIC of patients. Compared with pregabalin， mirogabalin was more effective in the treatment of pain. The safety of pregabalin and mirogabalin was similar， and compared with placebo， both pregabalin and mirogabalin increased the risk of common adverse reactions such as dizziness and somnolence. The safety of gabapentin was similar to placebo and duloxetine. Compared with duloxetine， pregabalin and gabapentin were not cost-effective. Compared with gabapentin， pregabalin was cost-effective. Mirogabalin was cost-effective， as compared with placebo and pregabalin. CONCLUSIONS Pregabalin and mirogabalin are effective in the treatment of DPNP， the efficacy of mirogabalin is better than pregabalin， and the safety is similar between them. The economic conclusions vary from country to country， pending a pharmacoeconomic study based on our population.
