Wall, Amanda

Abstract Background/Aims Sleep disturbance is a defining feature of fibromyalgia (FM), contributing to pain, fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and reduced quality of life. Effective management options remain limited. Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is effective in primary insomnia, but evidence in FM is sparse and access to face-to-face therapy is limited. Digital CBT-I (dCBT-I) offers a scalable, self-directed solution that may overcome these barriers. We conducted the first randomised controlled trial of dCBT-I in FM to evaluate its impact on quality of life and associated symptoms. Methods This single-blind randomised controlled trial evaluated Sleepio, a validated dCBT-I programme of six self-directed 20-minute sessions delivered over 12 weeks. Participants with a clinical diagnosis of FM, self-reported sleep disturbance, and cognitive complaints were recruited in Oxford, UK. After baseline assessment, participants were randomized to dCBT-I or a control group. All participants also received standardised sleep hygiene advice. The primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life measured by the revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR). Secondary outcomes included insomnia severity (Insomnia Severity Index), actigraphy-derived sleep parameters, pain (SF36 Bodily Pain Scale), cognitive complaints (British Columbia Cognitive Complaints Inventory), sustained attention, and fear of movement (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia). Outcomes were collected online at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle using constrained longitudinal data analysis. Ethical approval was obtained from South Central - Oxford B Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0168). The study was pre-registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05962138). Results Of 514 individuals contacted, 241 were screened, 132 were eligible, and 80 were randomised (42 dCBT-I, 38 control). The mean age was 46.6 (SD 14.5) years; 93.8% were female. Retention was high: 97.5% of participants provided outcomes at 3 months, and 83.8% at 6 months. In the dCBT-I group, 90.5% initiated the programme, and 54.8% reached the core session on sleep restriction therapy. At 3 months, there was no significant difference between groups in FIQR (mean difference −2.79; p = 0.3). At 6 months, however, dCBT-I participants demonstrated greater improvement in FIQR compared with controls (mean difference −5.45; 95% CI − 10.5 to − 0.4; p = 0.035), corresponding to a small-to-moderate effect size (Cohen’s d = −0.31). No significant between-group differences were observed for secondary outcomes. Conclusion In adults with FM, dCBT-I produced a sustained, clinically meaningful improvement in disease-related quality of life at 6 months compared with a sleep hygiene control. Although benefits were not observed across secondary outcomes, this trial provides the first controlled evidence that dCBT-I can address an important unmet need in FM. Digital behavioural therapies represent scalable, accessible, non-pharmacological interventions with potential for rapid integration into clinical care. Disclosure E. Kelleher: Grants/research support; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Pfizer Doctoral Fellowship (NIHR301808). A.J. Wall: Grants/research support; Grant is funded by UKRI and Versus Arthritis as part of the UKRI Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF) Advanced Pain Discovery Platform (APDP), a co-funded initiative by UKRI (MRC, BBSRC, ESRC), VA. V. Wanigasekera: None. R. Sharman: None. S. Kyle: None. I. Tracey: None. B. Seymour: Grants/research support; Grant is funded by UKRI and Versus Arthritis as part of the UKRI Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF) Advanced Pain Discovery Platform (APDP), a co-funded initiative by UKRI (MRC, BBSRC, ESRC), VA. A. Irani: Grants/research support; Grant is funded by UKRI and Versus Arthritis as part of the UKRI Strategic Priorities Fund (SPF) Advanced Pain Discovery Platform (APDP), a co-funded initiative by UKRI (MRC, BBSRC, ESRC), VA.

Abstract Introduction: Evidence increasingly shows small nerve fibre pathology in subsets of people with fibromyalgia through skin biopsy, corneal confocal microscopy, and microneurography. However, blood-based biomarkers of ongoing neuronal damage, particularly neurofilament light chain (NfL), an axonal structural protein, are not well established. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate serum NfL concentrations in fibromyalgia compared with other chronic pain conditions and assess their relationship with neuropathic-like pain. Methods: We measured serum NfL using Simoa SR-X NF Light v2 digital-immunoassay in 60 participants with fibromyalgia, 61 with endometriosis (another traditionally considered non-neuropathic pain condition), 24 with small fibre neuropathy (a recognised neuropathic pain condition), and 30 healthy controls. Serum NfL concentrations were compared between the groups controlling for age and body mass index. Neuropathic-like pain was assessed using the painDETECT questionnaire for fibromyalgia and endometriosis and NeuPSIG grading criteria for small fibre neuropathy. Results: Compared with healthy controls (mean concentration = 6.77 pg/mL, Z-score = −1.15), serum NfL concentrations were significantly elevated in fibromyalgia (mean concentration = 8.52 pg/mL P = 0.048; Z-score = −0.30, and P = 0.006) and small fibre neuropathy (mean concentration = 8.98 pg/mL, P = 0.004; Z-score = 0.23, P = 0.0001), with endometriosis representing an intermediate phenotype (mean concentration = 5.57 pg/mL, P = 0.44; Z-score = −0.41, P = 0.024). Using PainDETECT, 44% of fibromyalgia and 26% of endometriosis participants met likely neuropathic pain criteria; using NeupSIG grading, 96% of small fibre neuropathy participants met probable/definite criteria. Conclusion: Our study provides serological evidence of nerve pathology in fibromyalgia at comparable levels with small fibre neuropathy, although this did not correlate with neuropathic-like pain presence or severity. These findings highlight the need for subgroup-specific treatment strategies.

Abstract Objectives Sleep disturbance is a key symptom of fibromyalgia and a risk factor for chronic widespread pain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in improving sleep quality in fibromyalgia patients. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and CINAHL was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 2023. Studies assessing pharmacological or CBT interventions with sleep-related outcomes were included. Data were extracted, and meta-analyses were performed where applicable. Study quality and bias were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results Forty-seven RCTs, including 11 094 participants, were reviewed. CBT for insomnia (CBT-I) showed a significant improvement in sleep quality (SMD −0.63, 95% CI −0.98 to −0.27), while CBT for pain (CBT-P) had no significant impact. Pharmacological agents such as pregabalin and sodium oxybate moderately improved sleep, but there was uncertainty around this evidence. Amitriptyline, milnacipran and duloxetine showed no significant benefit for sleep. Study heterogeneity was moderate, and no publication bias was detected. Conclusion CBT-I is a promising treatment for enhancing sleep quality in fibromyalgia. Pharmacological treatments like pregabalin may be beneficial but should be used cautiously due to potential risks. Future research should prioritize trials focusing on sleep as a primary outcome and explore the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological treatments and CBT-I in fibromyalgia. Understanding the mechanisms linking sleep and fibromyalgia will also help guide future therapies.

Abstract Background/Aims Features of centralised pain, encompassing widespread pain and non-pain features such as multisensory hypersensitivity, fatigue, and sleep disturbance are common in RA. We hypothesise that centralised pain in early RA affects response to standard first-line treatment. Methods Prospective cohort study of adults with a clinical diagnosis of RA recruited from the early inflammatory arthritis clinic, Oxford University Hospitals, who completed an online assessment within two weeks of starting a DMARD. Centralised pain was assessed using three measures: the 2016 Fibromyalgia Survey Criteria (0-31), Central Sensitisation Inventory (CSI, 0-100), and PainDetect (0-38). The primary outcome, bodily pain, was assessed using the Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (BPS), where lower scores indicate worse pain severity. During follow-up, participants completed three sets of follow-up questionnaires at 3-, 6- and 12-months. Linear mixed effects models were used to account for repeated measurements and patient variability. Three models were fitted, for an association between baseline values of each centralised pain measure with BPS over time. An interaction between centralised pain scores with time was fitted to assess for effect of the exposure on change over time. Age, sex, and symptom duration at baseline were included as confounding variables. Ethical approval was granted by South Central Oxford B Research Ethics Committee. Results Of 149 participants, 117 (79%) completed follow-up: median (IQR) age 59.8 (24.6) years; 36% male; 30% with symptoms >1 year at baseline. There were no significant baseline differences among those lost to follow-up, apart from a longer symptom duration (53% vs 30% symptom duration >1 year; P = 0.033). At baseline, median (IQR) Fibromyalgia Survey Criteria, CSI, and PainDetect scores were 12 (6), 36 (17), and 14 (9) respectively. The median (IQR) BPS at baseline was 32.5 (22.5). Measures of centralised pain were moderately-to-strongly correlated with each other, and with BPS. Individuals with symptoms for >1 year had higher scores on the PainDetect (P = 0.0015), but not the CSI (P = 0.0545) or Fibromyalgia Survey Criteria (P = 0.672). After adjusting for age, sex, and symptom duration, there was a significant association between centralised pain at baseline and BPS over follow-up, e.g.; for every unit increase in the fibromyalgia survey criteria at baseline, the BPS decreased by 2.40 (95%CI -3.29, -1.49; P < 0.001) points over follow-up. Similar relationships were seen with the CSI and PainDetect scores. Conclusion Centralised pain measures in early RA patients can be indicative of the severity of bodily pain experienced during the subsequent 12 months after starting a DMARD treatment. Recognising and assessing centralised pain in early RA patients may enable us to tailor more effective and individualised treatment regimens. Further studies, especially those utilising neuroimaging and QST, are essential to elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying the impact of centralised pain on treatment outcomes in RA. Disclosure E. Kelleher: None. A.J. Wall: None. M.T. Sanchez-Santos: None. V. Wanigasekera: None. A. Irani (nee Soni): None.