A randomised, double-blinded study comparing giving etoricoxib vs. placebo to female patients with fibromyalgia

11Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives Current therapeutic approaches to fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) do not provide satisfactory pain control to a high percentage of patients. This unmet need constantly fuels the pursuit for new modalities for pain relief. This randomised, double-blind, controlled study assessed the efficacy and safety of adding etoricoxib vs. placebo to the current therapeutic regimen of female patients with FMS. Methods In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, female patients were randomised to receive either 90 mg etoricoxib once daily or placebo for 6 weeks. Several physical and mental parameters were assessed throughout the study. The primary end-point was the response to treatment, defined as ≥ 30% reduction in the average Brief Pain Inventory score. Secondary outcomes were changes in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, SF-36 Quality of Life assessment questionnaire and Hamilton rating scales for anxiety and depression. Results Overall, 73 patients were recruited. Although many outcome measures improved throughout the study, no difference was recorded between the etoricoxib- and placebo-treated groups. The Brief Pain Inventory, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, The Hamilton Anxiety and Depression scores did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions This is the first randomised, double-blind study assessing the effect of adding etoricoxib to pre-existing medications for female patients with FMS. Although being mildly underpowered this study clearly has shown that etoricoxib did not improve pain scores and did not lead to any beneficial mental or physical effects.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mahagna, H., Amital, D., & Amital, H. (2016). A randomised, double-blinded study comparing giving etoricoxib vs. placebo to female patients with fibromyalgia. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 70(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12760

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free