SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Comparison of tanezumab and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in efficacy and safety for chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) poses a significant global health burden often managed with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Tanezumab, a nerve growth factor (NGF) inhibitor, presents a potential alternative, but its comparative efficacy and safety relative to NSAIDs remain uncertain. This study aimed to compare tanezumab and NSAIDs for CLBP. Methods: This is a systematic review with meta-analysis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Cochrane Handbook. PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for literature published before March 10, 2025. Outcome measures included low back pain intensity (LBPI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores, adverse events (AEs), and response rates. Manager V.5.3.3 was used for statistical assessments. Results: Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, comprising 835 participants. Tanezumab at 10 mg dose demonstrated significantly greater reduction in LBPI scores at 1-week, 4-week, 8-week, and 12-week follow-ups compared to NSAIDs. Improvement in RMDQ scores was also superior with 10 mg tanezumab at 2-week and 16-week follow-ups. The 5 mg dose, however, did not exhibit a significant difference in functional improvement compared to NSAIDs. Both the 5 mg and 10 mg tanezumab doses showed similar rates of AEs compared to NSAIDs, except for a higher incidence of abnormal peripheral sensation with 10 mg tanezumab. Response rates ≥ 50% were significantly higher with 10 mg tanezumab compared to NSAIDs. Conclusion: Tanezumab at 10 mg demonstrates better pain relief and functional improvement for CLBP compared to NSAIDs, though it increases the risk of mild peripheral sensation abnormalities. The 5 mg dose, shows a comparable safety profile but no significant therapeutic advantages. While joint safety events significantly impacted development of tanezumab for OA, their rare occurrence in peripheral joints with pre-existing OA and absence in the lumbar spine within CLBP trials suggests its risk-benefit profile appears more acceptable in CLBP than in OA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.