Combination of pregabalin with duloxetine for fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fibromyalgia is a syndrome characterized by chronic widespread pain and associated with sleep disturbance, depression, fatigue, and cognitive dysfunction. Polypharmacy is commonly used, but supportive evidence is limited. Most fibromyalgia trials focus primarily on pain reduction with monotherapy. This trial compares a pregabalin-duloxetine combination to each monotherapy. Using a randomized, double-blind, 4-period crossover design, participants received maximally tolerated doses of placebo, pregabalin, duloxetine, and pregabalin-duloxetine combination-for 6 weeks. Primary outcome was daily pain (0-10); secondary outcomes included global pain relief, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, SF-36 survey, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), adverse events, and other measures. Of 41 participants randomized, 39 completed ≥2 treatments. Daily pain during placebo, pregabalin, duloxetine, and combination was 5.1, 5.0, 4.1, and 3.7, respectively (P < 0.05 only for combination vs placebo, and pregabalin). Participants (%) reporting ≥moderate global pain relief were 18%, 39%, 42%, and 68%, respectively (P < 0.05 for combination vs placebo, pregabalin, and duloxetine). Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire scores were 42.9, 37.4, 36.0, and 29.8, respectively (P < 0.05 for combination vs placebo, pregabalin, and duloxetine). SF-36 scores were 50.2, 55.7, 56.0, and 61.2, respectively (P < 0.05 for combination vs placebo, pregabalin, and duloxetine). Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale scores were 48.9, 35.2, 46.1, and 32.1, respectively (P < 0.05 only for combination vs placebo, and duloxetine). BDI-II scores were 11.9, 9.9, 10.7, and 8.9, respectively (P < 0.05 only for combination vs placebo). Moderate-severe drowsiness was more frequent during combination vs placebo. Combining pregabalin and duloxetine for fibromyalgia improves multiple clinical outcomes vs monotherapy. Continued research should compare this and other combinations to monotherapy for fibromyalgia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".