Methadone in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Methadone, being an N-Methyl-D-Aspartate receptor antagonist, may have a potential role in the treatment of neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of methadone in the treatment of neuropathic pain and to estimate the possible dose ranges needed for pain control. METHODS: Methadone was offered as a treatment option to consecutive cancer and noncancer patients with neuropathic pain. Pain intensity was measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) (0-10 cm where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst possible pain). Mechanical allodynia and paroxysmal (shooting) pain were assessed clinically. All assessments were collected prospectively before treatment and once a stable dose of methadone was reached. RESULTS: A total number of 18 patients met our inclusion criteria. The mean pretreatment VAS +/- SD was 7.7+/-1.5 cm and this dropped significantly to 1.4+/-1.7 cm on a stable dose of methadone (P<0.0001). Nine of 13 patients (70 %) had a complete resolution of mechanical allodynia and all eight patients (100%) with shooting pain reported a complete response. The median stable dose of methadone was 15 mg per day. CONCLUSION: Methadone at relatively low doses seems to be useful in the treatment of neuropathic pain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".