Altered functional connectivity has been demonstrated in key brain regions involved in pain processing in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. However, the impact of neuropathic pain treatment on functional connectivity does not appear to have been investigated. Sixteen participants underwent resting state functional MRI when optimally treated for neuropathic pain during their involvement in the Optimal Pathway for Treating Neuropathic Pain in Diabetes Mellitus trial and 1 week following withdrawal of treatment. On discontinuation of pain treatment, there was an increase in functional connectivity between the left thalamus and primary somatosensory cortex (S1) and the left thalamus and insular cortex, key brain regions that are involved in cerebral processing of pain. The changes in functional connectivity between scans also correlated with measures of pain (baseline pain severity and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory). Moreover, when participants were stratified into higher- and lower-than-average baseline pain subgroups, the change in thalamic-S1 cortical functional connectivity between scans was significantly greater in those with high baseline pain compared with the lower-baseline-pain group. This study shows that thalamo-cortical functional connectivity has the potential to act as an objective biomarker for neuropathic pain in diabetes for use in clinical pain trials.

Article Highlights
  • Functional connectivity alterations have been found in the brain in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), but the impact of treatment on these measures is unknown.

  • The study was aimed to address the question of whether functional connectivity between key pain processing brain regions will increase on withdrawal of treatment.

  • Study findings show discontinuation of neuropathic pain treatment leads to increases in functional connectivity between the thalamus and primary somatosensory and insular cortices.

  • Cerebral functional connectivity demonstrates the potential to act as an objective biomarker for painful DPN in clinical trials.

Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a common and disabling chronic complication of diabetes mellitus (1). It affects up to one-third of people with diabetes and often leads to severe and intractable pain that results in sleep impairment, mood disorders, and a poorer quality of life (2–4). Unfortunately, the currently recommended pharmacotherapeutic agents for painful DPN provide inadequate pain relief (5,6). The recent Optimal Pathway for Treating Neuropathic Pain in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM) trial demonstrated that even with combination treatment, only half of people with painful DPN achieved 50% pain relief (5). A greater understanding of the pathophysiology of painful DPN, including the cerebral mechanisms, is likely to provide key targets for therapeutic interventions (7). Furthermore, this approach may identify objective biomarkers of painful DPN that might be used as outcome measures in clinical pain trials (8).

Resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) is a neuroimaging technique for investigating brain function at rest (9). It measures changes in blood oxygen level–dependent (BOLD) signals to examine neuronal activity in different regions of the brain. Using this technique, it is possible to determine regions of the brain that are functionally connected. Functional connectivity analysis involves correlating the spontaneous fluctuations in resting-state activity between remote areas of the brain. This technique has largely been used in research, but there is a huge potential for clinical application in painful DPN (10). We previously demonstrated alterations in functional connectivity in different clinical phenotypes of painful DPN, whereby individuals with the irritable nociceptor phenotype had greater thalamic-insular and reduced thalamus-primary somatosensory cortical connectivity compared with the nonirritable nociceptor phenotype (11). Additionally, self-reported neuropathic pain severity correlated with thalamic-insular cortical functional connectivity (11). We also have shown that rs-fMRI could predict the treatment response in painful DPN (12). Moreover, brain activity and functional connectivity in regions of the brain associated with pain perception have been shown to reduce with analgesic therapy in a heterogeneous group of patients with chronic pain (13,14). However, the impact of treatment on the functional connectivity of key brain regions involved in somatosensory processing of painful DPN has not been investigated to our knowledge.

We therefore performed a neuroimaging study in a subgroup of patients participating in the OPTION-DM trial in which patients were optimized to current first-line neuropathic pain agents, either as monotherapy or combination treatment, over 16 weeks (5). There is consensus, including from the ADA, that these include duloxetine, pregabalin, amitriptyline, and gabapentin. Participants underwent two rs-fMRI scans, the first while receiving optimized treatment and the second after treatment discontinuation. We hypothesized that there will be an increase in functional connectivity between key pain processing brain regions (e.g., thalamic-insular cortex [IC]) on withdrawal of treatment.

Study Design

This neuroimaging substudy was part of the OPTION-DM clinical trial. The OPTION-DM trial examined three 16-week treatment pathways: oral amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin (5,15). After a screening visit, participants’ existing analgesic medications were washed out over 1–2 weeks, after which baseline pain severity, according to an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS; 0 being no pain and 10 being the worst pain imaginable). Participants were randomly allocated to the three treatment pathways, with each treatment pathway lasting 16 weeks. Each pathway had two treatment phases, each with a 2-week titration period. In the first treatment phase, participants received monotherapy for 6 weeks. Responders (defined as an NRS score <3 at week 6) continued monotherapy for an additional 10 weeks. Nonresponders (defined as an NRS score ≥3 at week 6) started the second drug in the treatment pathway. Participants enrolled in this observational study underwent an rs-fMRI scan at the final participant visit in a treatment pathway at week 16, when their pain was optimally treated (scan 1). Treatment pathway medications were then discontinued, a 1-week washout period was implemented, and participants underwent a second rs-fMRI at the end of this period (scan 2).

Participants

Sixteen consecutive right-handed individuals with painful DPN who were approaching the end of a treatment pathway in OPTION-DM were recruited at Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Trust (5,15). Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for diabetes according to the World Health Organization (16), had distal symmetrical polyneuropathy confirmed (17) by the modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (mTCNS; score ≥5) (18), and had daily neuropathic pain confirmed by the Douleur Neuropathique 4 questionnaire (DN4; score ≥4) (19) for at least 3 months. All participants provided written informed consent.

The full OPTION-DM trial protocol is available elsewhere (5,15), but key inclusion criteria were average daily pain intensity of at least 4 over 7 days on the NRS while off pain medication, aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase concentrations lower than twice the upper limit of normal, an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or higher, and stable glucose control over the preceding 3 months with glycated hemoglobin concentrations of 12% (108 mmol/mol) or lower (5,15).

Exclusion criteria included the following: a history of epilepsy, depression requiring antidepressant medications, pregnancy and breastfeeding, postural hypotension (systolic blood pressure drop >20 mm Hg on standing for 3 min), cardiac arrhythmias and conduction abnormalities on 12-lead electrocardiogram, prostatic hypertrophy, other painful peripheral neuropathies, the concomitant presence of other painful medical conditions that were as severe as their painful DPN, major amputations of the lower limbs, active diabetic foot ulcers, and substantial suicide risk (5,15).

Additional exclusion criteria for this neuroimaging study included left-handedness, neurological disorders that may confound radiological assessments and contraindications for MRI (e.g., claustrophobia or irremovable ferromagnetic object on the participant).

Clinical Assessments

At screening for the OPTION-DM trial, participants underwent a detailed structured medical history, physical and neurological examinations, and biochemical tests (e.g., urinary albumin-creatine ratio, HbA1c, and creatinine). The mTCNS and DN4 were done to confirm the presence of DPN and neuropathic pain, respectively. Participants also completed the following questionnaires: Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory for subgroup analysis relating to pain phenotype (20); Hospital Anxiety and Depression score to assess for the presence of anxiety and depression (21); Insomnia Severity Index (22); and EuroQoL-5D-5L to measure health related quality of life (23).

We assessed pain severity using the NRS at three times for this neuroimaging study: 1) at OPTION-DM study baseline after analgesic medications had been withdrawn; 2) at the end of the week-16 pathway, at scan 1; and 3) after treatment pathway medications had been withdrawn and washed out for 1 week, at scan 2. The onset, severity, and duration of adverse events were recorded in patient diaries as a part of the OPTION-DM trial, and these were assessed at scans 1 and 2.

Brain Imaging Acquisition and Analysis

Structural and Functional Imaging Acquisition

Brain imaging data were acquired using a 3.0 Tesla scanner (Ingenia; Phillips Medical Systems, Best, Holland). Anatomic data were acquired using a T1-weighted magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo sequence with the following parameters: repetition time of 7.2 ms, echo time of 3.2 ms, flip angle of 8°, and voxel size of 0.9 mm3. The rs-fMRI sequence was obtained after participants were asked to remain as still as possible in the scanner and while they were fixated on a cross to avoid brain wandering. The scan was a T2*-weighted pulse sequence with the following parameters: repetition time, 2600 ms; echo time, 3.5 ms; in-plane pixel dimensions, 1.8 mm × 1.8 mm; and contiguous transaxial slices, 4 mm orientated in the oblique axial plane. We acquired 150 volumes with a total scan time of 6.5 min.

Imaging Analysis

Image preprocessing and functional connectivity rs-fMRI analysis were performed with the Neuroimaging Tools & Resource Collaboratory Functional Connectivity (CONN) Toolbox and SPM12 (24) (Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, London, U.K.) in MATLAB 2021a (MathWorks, Natick, MA). The component based noise correction method within CONN was used for spatial and temporal preprocessing to define and remove confounds in BOLD signal to prevent the impact of physiological noise and motion in the data (24,25).

To mitigate artifacts arising from motion we used artifact detection tools and principal component filtering of signal from tissues that may not be of interest, such as white matter and cerebrospinal fluid, a method known component correction (25) provided within the CONN toolbox software package.

Fisher transformation was used to convert correlation coefficients to normally distributed scores to enable second-level general linear model analysis (26). The correlation maps were dependent on the specific location of the seed so that functionally and anatomically heterogenous regions of interest (ROIs) were dissociated to delineate functional boundaries across the cortex. Twenty-one ROIs involved in somatic and nonsomatic pain processing were chosen for analyses (27): the anterior and posterior cingulate gyrus; and the left and right of the following ROIs: the thalamus, caudate, putamen, amygdala, accumbens, primary somatosensory cortex (S1), primary motor cortex, insular and frontal orbital cortex; and the default mode network.

These regions are predefined based on atlases provided by the CONN toolbox software, which is a combination of the Harvard Oxford Atlas and the Automated Anatomical Labeling atlas (24). These ROIs were used as the seeds of interest for subject-specific ROI-to-ROI connectivity analyses. Functional connectivity measures were computed between seed areas for ROI-to-ROI analysis and to create ROI-to-ROI connectivity. The CONN toolbox used a linear measure of functional connectivity between bivariate correlation and bivariate regression coefficients, with their associated multivariate measures of semipartial-correlation and multivariate-regression coefficients to calculate functional connectivity. After each subject had ROI-to-ROI connectivity matrices, the ROI-level analyses were evaluated through F or Wilks λ statistics depending on the dimensionality of the within- and between-subjects contrasts. Connectivity contrast effect size among all ROI sources was calculated alongside t and F values, uncorrected P values, and false discovery rate (FDR)–corrected P values for each specified second-level analysis. The F test was used to calculate the multivariate connectivity strength for each threshold. The significance of ROI-to-ROI connection was determined through false-positive control FDR-corrected P values with a χ2 test with two-sided inferences. Thus, using aforementioned statistical methods, the ROI-to-ROI analyses results are considered appropriately corrected for multiple comparisons across all brain and analysis voxels. We tested the interaction between scan 1, when participants were receiving optimal treatment, and scan 2, when participants had been withdrawn and washed out. Significant ROI-to-ROI connections were determined by P < 0.05 following false-positive control (FDR).

Statistical Analysis

Continuous data are presented as mean (±SD) and categorical data as number (percentage). Paired t tests were used to compare clinical variables and rs-fMRI functional connectivity obtained during scans 1 and 2. In addition, z values of the difference in functional connectivity from scan 1 to scan 2 (scan 2 – scan 1 = Δ functional connectivity) were correlated to other variables using Pearson correlation. After the initial analysis, participants were stratified into subgroups based on baseline NRS pain scores to investigate the relationship of functional connectivity alterations between scans and pain severity. The baseline mean NRS pain score was 7.9 (±1.9); therefore, we stratified patients into two groups: 1) higher-than-average baseline pain (baseline NRS pain score ≥7.9); and 2) lower-than-average baseline pain (baseline NRS pain score <7.9). Independent t tests were performed to compare continuous clinical and neuroimaging parameters between these groups, and the χ2 test was conducted for categorical data. Data were analyzed using SPSS, version 28.0 (IBM).

Data and Resource Availability

The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Baseline Clinical Characteristics

A total of 16 participants were recruited and underwent the first MRI scan; however, one patient did not attend the second MRI scan and was therefore excluded from the analysis. The clinical characteristics of the participants at baseline are presented in Table 1.

Table 1

Baseline clinical characteristics of study participants

CharacteristicValue
Age, years 62.1 ± 9.0 
Female sex 2 (13.3) 
BMI, kg/m2 30.5 ± 5.7 
Duration of diabetes, years 14.5 ± 11.6 
HbA1c, mmol/mol 65.3 ± 16.2 
Type of diabetes  
 Type 1 1 (6.7) 
 Type 2 13 (86.7) 
 MODY 1 (6.7) 
mTCNS 18.6 ± 7.3 
DN4 6.5 ± 1.2 
Baseline NRS pain score 7.9 ± 1.9 
Treatment pathway  
 P–A combination therapy 4 (26.7) 
 D–P combination therapy 2 (13.3) 
 A–P combination therapy 3 (20) 
 P monotherapy 3 (20) 
 A monotherapy 2 (13.3) 
 D monotherapy 1 (6.7) 
HADS-D 8.7 ± 3.8 
Depression 5 (33.3) 
HADS-A 7.5 ± 3.8 
Anxiety 3 (20.0) 
Insomnia Severity Index 20.4 ± 4.7 
EQ-5D-5L 54.8 ± 21.4 
Pain Catastrophizing Scale 24.5 ± 12.6 
Total NPSI 27.6 ± 6.2 
CharacteristicValue
Age, years 62.1 ± 9.0 
Female sex 2 (13.3) 
BMI, kg/m2 30.5 ± 5.7 
Duration of diabetes, years 14.5 ± 11.6 
HbA1c, mmol/mol 65.3 ± 16.2 
Type of diabetes  
 Type 1 1 (6.7) 
 Type 2 13 (86.7) 
 MODY 1 (6.7) 
mTCNS 18.6 ± 7.3 
DN4 6.5 ± 1.2 
Baseline NRS pain score 7.9 ± 1.9 
Treatment pathway  
 P–A combination therapy 4 (26.7) 
 D–P combination therapy 2 (13.3) 
 A–P combination therapy 3 (20) 
 P monotherapy 3 (20) 
 A monotherapy 2 (13.3) 
 D monotherapy 1 (6.7) 
HADS-D 8.7 ± 3.8 
Depression 5 (33.3) 
HADS-A 7.5 ± 3.8 
Anxiety 3 (20.0) 
Insomnia Severity Index 20.4 ± 4.7 
EQ-5D-5L 54.8 ± 21.4 
Pain Catastrophizing Scale 24.5 ± 12.6 
Total NPSI 27.6 ± 6.2 

The data are presented as mean ± SD for parametric continuous data or number and percentage for categorical data. A, amitriptyline; D, duloxetine; EQ-5D-5L, EuroQoL-5D-5L; HADS-A, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – Anxiety; HADS-D, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – Depression; MODY, maturity-onset diabetes of the young; P, pregabalin.

There was a significant increase in NRS pain scores from scan 1 to scan 2 from a mean (± SD) of 4.0 ± 2.1 to 6.1 ± 2.4 (P = 0.044, paired t test). No participants were experiencing adverse events, and there were no changes in adverse events (i.e., analgesia withdrawal symptoms) between scans 1 and 2 that might act as a confounding factor for the neuroimaging results. Comparing the functional connectivity in scan 1 with that in scan 2 (i.e., scan 2 > scan 1), there was a significantly greater functional connectivity between the left thalamus and S1 (r β [correlation coefficient beta value] = −0.27; seed-level correction −3.57; for FDR, P = 0.041; Fig. 1A and B) and the left thalamus and IC (r β = −0.18; seed-level correction, −3.43; for FDR, P = 0.041; Fig. 1A and C). Significant results from scan 1 > scan 2 were the same as for scan 2 > scan 1 except the correlation was positive. For the rest of the article, we present the scan 2 > scan 1 results. No other significant (P < 0.05) FDR correlations between ROIs were demonstrated.

Figure 1

Left view of difference in resting-state functional connectivity between scan 1 and scan 2 (A). The ROI spheres from correspond to the center of the region of the atlas used in the CONN toolbox software. Box-and-whisker plots show the effect size in differences between scans 1 and 2 of S1-thalamus B: and IC-thalamus C: functional connectivity using an uncorrected t test. PostCG, post central gyrus.

Figure 1

Left view of difference in resting-state functional connectivity between scan 1 and scan 2 (A). The ROI spheres from correspond to the center of the region of the atlas used in the CONN toolbox software. Box-and-whisker plots show the effect size in differences between scans 1 and 2 of S1-thalamus B: and IC-thalamus C: functional connectivity using an uncorrected t test. PostCG, post central gyrus.

Close modal

Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis was performed between Δ thalamic-S1 and thalamic-IC functional connectivity and pain variables (Supplementary Tables 1 and 2). There were significant correlations between Δ thalamic-S1 functional connectivity and baseline measures of neuropathic pain, including baseline NRS score (Pearson correlation r = 0.585; P = 0.022; Fig. 2), total NPSI (r = 0.597; P = 0.019), and the total burning NPSI subscore (r = 0.578; P = 0.024). There was also a trend toward a correlation between Δ thalamic-S1 functional connectivity and the duration of painful DPN (r = 0.489; P = 0.064) and the scan 2 NRS − scan 1 NRS (r = 0.475; P = 0.074). However, there were no correlations between Δ thalamic-IC functional connectivity and clinical variables collected at baseline. There was no relationship in rs-fMRI variables and depression or anxiety.

Figure 2

Pearson correlation between Δ thalamic-S1 functional connectivity and baseline pain NRS scores (r = 0.585; P = 0.022).

Figure 2

Pearson correlation between Δ thalamic-S1 functional connectivity and baseline pain NRS scores (r = 0.585; P = 0.022).

Close modal

Relationship of Functional Connectivity to High and Low Pain

For the higher-than-average baseline pain subgroup, mean baseline pain NRS score ± SD was 9.0 ± 0.9); for the lower-than-average baseline pain subgroup, mean baseline pain NRS score ± SD was 5.8 ± 0.8 (for independent t test, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in clinical or demographic variables between the two groups other than pain scores (Table 2). The NRS at scan 1 was statistically similar between the two groups (mean NRS ± SD for higher- vs. lower-than-average baseline pain at scan 1: 3.9 ± 2.1 vs. 4.2 ± 2.4, respectively; P = 0.302) but was significantly higher in the higher-than-average baseline pain group at scan 2 after discontinuation of pain medications (mean NRS ± SD for higher- vs. lower-than-average baseline pain at scan 2: 7.0 ± 1.8 vs. 4.4 ± 2.7, respectively; P = 0.006).

Table 2

Pain, clinical, demographic, metabolic, and rs-fMRI variables in participants stratified by severity of baseline pain NRS score

Higher-than-average baseline pain (NRS score ≥7.9), n = 10Lower-than-average baseline pain (NRS score <7.9), n = 5P value*
Baseline NRS score 9.0 ± 0.9 5.8 ± 0.8 <0.001 
NRS scan 1 3.9 ± 2.1 4.2 ± 2.4 0.302 
NRS scan 2 7.0 ± 1.8 4.4 ± 2.7 0.022 
NRS scan 2 − scan 1 3.1 ± 2.1 0.2 ± 0.4 0.006 
Age, years 64.5 ± 10.1 57.4 ± 3.0 0.078 
Female sex, n, % 1, 10% 1, 20% 0.571 
Duration of diabetes, years 17.3 ± 13.5 9.0 ± 2.5 0.102 
BMI, kg/m2 30.8 ± 6.3 29.9 ± 5.2 0.393 
Type of diabetes, n (%)   0.562 
 Type 1 1 (10) 0 (0)  
 Type 2 8 (80) 5 (100)  
 MODY 1 (10) 0 (0)  
Systolic BP, mm Hg 139.3 ± 15.3 144.4 ± 30.7 0.334 
HbA1c, mmol/mol 66.0 ± 11.5 64.0 ± 24.7 0.415 
mTCNS 18.8 ± 6.4 18.2 ± 9.8 0.444 
Total NPSI score 29.6 ± 6.7 23.5 ± 1.4 0.035 
 NPSI subscore    
  Burning 6.5 ± 3.2 4.0 ± 2.3 0.072 
  Pressing 6.5 ± 2.7 3.8 ± 1.7 0.035 
  Paroxysmal 5.0 ± 3.1 4.6 ± 1.5 0.407 
  Evoked pain 4.9 ± 2.3 4.1 ± 2.6 0.278 
  Dysesthesia 6.8 ± 2.0 7.0 ± 2.0 0.428 
Insomnia Severity Index 21.6 ± 3.7 18.0 ± 6.0 0.086 
HADS depression score 8.9 ± 2.3 8.4 ± 6.1 0.409 
HADS anxiety score 7.4 ± 4.5 7.8 ± 1.8 0.427 
EQ-5D-5L questionnaire 52.1 ± 23.7 60.2 ± 16.7 0.255 
Pain Catastrophizing Scale score 23.5 ± 13.4 26.4 ± 12.0 0.345 
Neuropathic pain medication at scan 1, n (%)   0.412 
 A 1 (10) 1 (20)  
 P 3 (30) 0 (0)  
 D 0 (0) 1 (20)  
 A–P combination therapy 1 (10) 2 (40)  
 P–A combination therapy 3 (30) 0 (0)  
 D–P combination therapy 2 (20) 1 (20)  
Δ S1 − Th FC 0.372 ± 0.275 0.051 ± 0.183 0.017 
Δ IC − Th FC 0.168 ± 0.153 0.190 ± 0.291 0.422 
Higher-than-average baseline pain (NRS score ≥7.9), n = 10Lower-than-average baseline pain (NRS score <7.9), n = 5P value*
Baseline NRS score 9.0 ± 0.9 5.8 ± 0.8 <0.001 
NRS scan 1 3.9 ± 2.1 4.2 ± 2.4 0.302 
NRS scan 2 7.0 ± 1.8 4.4 ± 2.7 0.022 
NRS scan 2 − scan 1 3.1 ± 2.1 0.2 ± 0.4 0.006 
Age, years 64.5 ± 10.1 57.4 ± 3.0 0.078 
Female sex, n, % 1, 10% 1, 20% 0.571 
Duration of diabetes, years 17.3 ± 13.5 9.0 ± 2.5 0.102 
BMI, kg/m2 30.8 ± 6.3 29.9 ± 5.2 0.393 
Type of diabetes, n (%)   0.562 
 Type 1 1 (10) 0 (0)  
 Type 2 8 (80) 5 (100)  
 MODY 1 (10) 0 (0)  
Systolic BP, mm Hg 139.3 ± 15.3 144.4 ± 30.7 0.334 
HbA1c, mmol/mol 66.0 ± 11.5 64.0 ± 24.7 0.415 
mTCNS 18.8 ± 6.4 18.2 ± 9.8 0.444 
Total NPSI score 29.6 ± 6.7 23.5 ± 1.4 0.035 
 NPSI subscore    
  Burning 6.5 ± 3.2 4.0 ± 2.3 0.072 
  Pressing 6.5 ± 2.7 3.8 ± 1.7 0.035 
  Paroxysmal 5.0 ± 3.1 4.6 ± 1.5 0.407 
  Evoked pain 4.9 ± 2.3 4.1 ± 2.6 0.278 
  Dysesthesia 6.8 ± 2.0 7.0 ± 2.0 0.428 
Insomnia Severity Index 21.6 ± 3.7 18.0 ± 6.0 0.086 
HADS depression score 8.9 ± 2.3 8.4 ± 6.1 0.409 
HADS anxiety score 7.4 ± 4.5 7.8 ± 1.8 0.427 
EQ-5D-5L questionnaire 52.1 ± 23.7 60.2 ± 16.7 0.255 
Pain Catastrophizing Scale score 23.5 ± 13.4 26.4 ± 12.0 0.345 
Neuropathic pain medication at scan 1, n (%)   0.412 
 A 1 (10) 1 (20)  
 P 3 (30) 0 (0)  
 D 0 (0) 1 (20)  
 A–P combination therapy 1 (10) 2 (40)  
 P–A combination therapy 3 (30) 0 (0)  
 D–P combination therapy 2 (20) 1 (20)  
Δ S1 − Th FC 0.372 ± 0.275 0.051 ± 0.183 0.017 
Δ IC − Th FC 0.168 ± 0.153 0.190 ± 0.291 0.422 

The data are presented as mean ± SD for parametric continuous data or number and percentage for categorical data. A, amitriptyline; BP, blood pressure; D, duloxetine; EQ-5D-5L, EuroQoL-5D-5L; FC, functional connectivity; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; IC, insular cortex; MODY, maturity-onset diabetes of the young; P, pregabalin; Th, thalamus.

*

Statistical test was the independent t test or χ2 test, the latter indicated by †. Boldface text denotes P < 0.05.

The Δ thalamic-S1 functional connectivity was significantly greater in the higher- compared with the lower-than-average baseline pain group (P = 0.017; Fig. 3). There was no significant group difference in the Δ S1-IC functional connectivity (P = 0.422).

Figure 3

Change in thalamic-S1 functional connectivity in higher- and lower-than-average baseline pain groups (P = 0.017, independent t test).

Figure 3

Change in thalamic-S1 functional connectivity in higher- and lower-than-average baseline pain groups (P = 0.017, independent t test).

Close modal

In this study, we investigated whether resting state functional connectivity is altered after discontinuation of neuropathic pain treatment in the OPTION-DM trial. We found there was an increase in functional connectivity between the thalamus and S1 cortex and the thalamus and IC. The change in thalamic-S1 functional connectivity between scans also correlated with measures of baseline pain. When the participants were subgrouped on the basis of their baseline pain being greater than or lower than average, we found that participants with higher-than-average baseline pain had a greater change in thalamic-S1 functional connectivity between the two scans.

The thalamus, IC, and S1 cortex are key brain regions involved in the processing of pain and are activated during acute pain (28). The thalamocortical pathway is primarily involved in the sensory or discriminate aspect of pain detection and coding of pain intensity (29), with elevated thalamic-S1 functional connectivity found in chronic pain (30,31). We have previously shown thalamic hyperperfusion (32) and higher sensory cortical energy metabolism in painful DPN (33). In addition, we have demonstrated that thalamic-IC and thalamic-S1 cortical functional connectivity differentiated between “irritable” and “nonirritable” nociceptor (34) phenotypes in painful DPN (11) and that the IC to corticolimbic connectivity predicted response to intravenous lidocaine treatment in patients with painful DPN (12). Therefore, the findings of this study provide further evidence for the increased engagement of the thalamo-cortical pathway in painful DPN. In this study, we did not find any increased connectivity in the default mode network or other regions of the brain involved in pain perception (e.g., anterior cingulate cortex, amygdala). This could be due to the magnetic resonance modality of short scanning of rs-fMRI rather than a response to an external noxious stimulus that activates these regions.

The relationship between the thalamo-cortical functional connectivity and baseline pain severity is consistent with findings from studies of other chronic pain conditions (31). The group difference in thalamo-cortical connectivity may reflect the greater change in pain between the higher-than-average baseline pain and lower-than-average baseline pain groups, consistent with the trend toward a correlation between the change in thalamo-cortical connectivity and NRS score between the two scans. An alternative explanation could be that people with higher baseline pain have greater engagement through the thalamo-cortical pathway, with greater responsiveness to withdrawal of pain therapies.

The current treatments available for painful DPN provide less-than-optimal pain relief, with only around 50% achieving 50% pain relief with maximal combination treatment (5). Indeed, there has been little progress in the discovery of new treatments for this distressing complication of diabetes over the past decade (6), with current first-line medications unchanged over the past 20 years. Although there has been significant progress in our understanding of the pain mechanisms, including the role of peripheral and central sensitization in the initiation and maintenance of neuropathic pain, the relative contributions of peripheral and central mechanisms remain unknown (35). The lack of objective biomarkers of neuropathic pain has also hampered progress in the development of more objective end points for clinical trials (8). Current pain trials rely on self-reported pain outcomes, which are influenced by contextual factors, mood, and cognition (36). Thus, there has been considerable interest in the development of objective biomarkers as clinical end points in pain trials, including neuroimaging markers (8). In this context, these results indicate that rs-fMRI measures may have a potential as objective biomarkers for pain in clinical pain trials.

To our knowledge, only one other study has investigated neuroimaging parameters in patients with painful DPN receiving treatment or not (37). The researchers demonstrated reduced anterior cingulate cortex blood flow after 3 months of duloxetine treatment. However, that study used intravenous 123I–N-isopropyl-p-iodoamphetamine single-photon emission computed tomography, which is unlikely to have widespread clinical application, because of its invasive nature and radiation. In contrast, rs-fMRI, is noninvasive, has a short scanning time (6 min), does not use ionizing radiation, and the data can be analyzed using validated techniques and may be amenable to analysis with artificial intelligence (38,39). Few studies have explored the impact of treatment upon functional connectivity using rs-fMRI, and our study is the first in painful DPN. Therapeutic interventions have demonstrated changes in functional connectivity measures in some small studies in fibromyalgia (40,41) and osteoarthritis (42). However, none of these studies demonstrated alterations in functional connectivity networks identified in our present study. The reasons for this are likely the heterogeneity in brain activation in different clinical pain conditions, small study numbers, discrepancies in investigative techniques, and different treatment modalities. Future studies with larger sample sizes and that assess the impact of neuropathic pain treatments prospectively may identify alterations in functional connectivity between other ROIs (e.g., default mode network); however, the connectivity between the thalamus and somatosensory cortex and IC appear to be the most important for coding of pain severity in painful DPN.

There are several strengths and limitations to this proof-of-concept study. A key strength is that this is the first rs-fMRI study—a relatively easy, short-duration, and noninvasive MR modality with a huge potential for clinical application—to examine alterations in functional connectivity in patients with painful DPN receiving analgesic treatment or not. The study took advantage of being conducted alongside a well-designed clinical trial in which patients were optimized to neuropathic pain treatment using a standardized protocol of dose titration over 16 weeks (5,15). Although patients were following different neuropathic pain regimens, our hypothesis was that there would be an increase in functional connectivity independent of the specific neuropathic pain treatment in this proof-of-concept study. The limitation of the study includes the lack of a control group and the small sample size. A larger sample size might have allowed study of a broader range of pain phenotypes (e.g., greater range of pain intensity, irritable, nonirritable nociceptor phenotype, duration of pain).

In conclusion, we found increased functional connectivity of the thalamus to the S1 cortex and thalamus to the IC associated with an increase in pain severity after discontinuation of analgesic agents for painful DPN. Thus, rs-fMRI measures of functional connectivity in regions of the brain associated with nociception demonstrate the potential to act as a biomarker for neuropathic pain in diabetes. Studies will need to be performed in a larger cohort, with participants randomized to receive placebo or one neuropathic pain agent before and after treatment.

This article contains supplementary material online at https://doi.org/10.2337/figshare.26058877.

Acknowledgments. The authors acknowledge the hard work, skills, and contributions of the radiographers at the University of Sheffield Magnetic Resonance Imaging Department and the OPTION-DM trial team at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals. The authors also greatly appreciate the participants who took part in this study and who spent a considerable amount of time and effort as a part of the OPTION-DM trial.

Dr. Iain D. Wilkinson, who substantially contributed to this research, died on 22 October 2020 before publication of this work. Dr. Wilkinson will be fondly remembered and sadly missed.

Funding. The Sheffield Teaching Hospitals Diabetes Charitable Trust funded this study. OPTION-DM was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Duality of Interest. No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author Contributions. G.S. recruited participants; undertook clinical and neurophysiological assessments; researched, analyzed, and interpreted clinical data; and wrote the manuscript. K.T. analyzed the magnetic resonance data. S.C., I.W., and D.S. made substantial contributions to the study design; acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; and drafting of the article and gave final approval of the version published. S.T. made substantial contributions to conception and designs, reviewed and revised the manuscript, and gave final approval of the version published. S.T. is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Prior Presentation. This work was presented at the 82nd American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions, New Orleans, LA, 3–7 June 2022; the 58th European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) Annual Meeting, Stockholm, Sweden, 22 September 2022); and the hybrid Diabetes UK Professional Conference, London, U.K., and Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India, 29 March to 1 April 2022.

1.
Abbott
CA
,
Malik
RA
,
van Ross
ERE
,
Kulkarni
J
,
Boulton
AJM
.
Prevalence and characteristics of painful diabetic neuropathy in a large community-based diabetic population in the U.K
.
Diabetes Care
2011
;
34
:
2220
2224
2.
Tölle
T
,
Xu
X
,
Sadosky
AB
.
Painful diabetic neuropathy: a cross-sectional survey of health state impairment and treatment patterns
.
J Diabetes Complications
2006
;
20
:
26
33
3.
Galer
BS
,
Gianas
A
,
Jensen
MP
.
Painful diabetic polyneuropathy: epidemiology, pain description, and quality of life
.
Diabetes Res Clin Pract
2000
;
47
:
123
128
4.
Selvarajah
D
,
Cash
T
,
Sankar
A
, et al
.
The contributors of emotional distress in painful diabetic neuropathy
.
Diab Vasc Dis Res
2014
;
11
:
218
225
5.
Tesfaye
S
,
Sloan
G
,
Petrie
J
, et al.;
OPTION-DM trial group
.
Comparison of amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (OPTION-DM): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised crossover trial
.
Lancet
2022
;
400
:
680
690
6.
Sloan
G
,
Alam
U
,
Selvarajah
D
,
Tesfaye
S
.
The treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy
.
Curr Diabetes Rev
2022
;
18
:
e070721194556
7.
Feldman
EL
,
Nave
K-A
,
Jensen
TS
,
Bennett
DLH
.
New horizons in diabetic neuropathy: mechanisms, bioenergetics, and pain
.
Neuron
2017
;
93
:
1296
1313
8.
Davis
KD
,
Aghaeepour
N
,
Ahn
AH
, et al
.
Discovery and validation of biomarkers to aid the development of safe and effective pain therapeutics: challenges and opportunities
.
Nat Rev Neurol
2020
;
16
:
381
400
9.
Fox
MD
,
Greicius
M
.
Clinical applications of resting state functional connectivity
.
Front Syst Neurosci
2010
;
4
:
19
10.
Diaz
MM
,
Caylor
J
,
Strigo
I
, et al
.
Toward composite pain biomarkers of neuropathic pain-focus on peripheral neuropathic pain
.
Front Pain Res (Lausanne)
2022
;
3
:
869215
11.
Teh
K
,
Wilkinson
ID
,
Heiberg-Gibbons
F
, et al
.
Somatosensory network functional connectivity differentiates clinical pain phenotypes in diabetic neuropathy
.
Diabetologia
2021
;
64
:
1412
1421
12.
Wilkinson
ID
,
Teh
K
,
Heiberg-Gibbons
F
, et al
.
Determinants of treatment response in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a combined deep sensory phenotyping and multimodal brain MRI study
.
Diabetes
2020
;
69
:
1804
1814
13.
Kim
D
,
Chae
Y
,
Park
H-J
,
Lee
I-S
.
Effects of chronic pain treatment on altered functional and metabolic activities in the brain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies
.
Front Neurosci
2021
;
15
:
684926
14.
Motoyama
Y
,
Oshiro
Y
,
Takao
Y
, et al
.
Resting-state brain functional connectivity in patients with chronic pain who responded to subanesthetic-dose ketamine
.
Sci Rep
2019
;
9
:
12912
15.
Selvarajah
D
,
Petrie
J
,
White
D
, et al.;
OPTION-DM group
.
Multicentre, double-blind, crossover trial to identify the Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
.
Trials
2018
;
19
:
578
16.
Alberti
KGMM
,
Zimmet
PZ
,
WHO Consultation
.
Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Provisional report of a WHO Consultation
.
Diabet Med
1998
;
15
:
539
553
17.
Tesfaye
S
,
Boulton
AJM
,
Dyck
PJ
, et al.;
Toronto Diabetic Neuropathy Expert Group
.
Diabetic neuropathies: update on definitions, diagnostic criteria, estimation of severity, and treatments
.
Diabetes Care
2010
;
33
:
2285
2293
18.
Bril
V
,
Tomioka
S
,
Buchanan
RA
,
Perkins
BA
,
Group mS
.
Reliability and validity of the modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score in diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy
.
Diabet Med
2009
;
26
:
240
246
19.
Bouhassira
D
,
Attal
N
,
Alchaar
H
, et al
.
Comparison of pain syndromes associated with nervous or somatic lesions and development of a new neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4)
.
Pain
2005
;
114
:
29
36
20.
Bouhassira
D
,
Attal
N
,
Fermanian
J
, et al
.
Development and validation of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory
.
Pain
2004
;
108
:
248
257
21.
Zigmond
AS
,
Snaith
RP
.
The hospital anxiety and depression scale
.
Acta Psychiatr Scand
1983
;
67
:
361
370
22.
Bastien
CH
,
Vallières
A
,
Morin
CM
.
Validation of the Insomnia Severity Index as an outcome measure for insomnia research
.
Sleep Med
2001
;
2
:
297
307
23.
Herdman
M
,
Gudex
C
,
Lloyd
A
, et al
.
Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)
.
Qual Life Res
2011
;
20
:
1727
1736
24.
Whitfield-Gabrieli
S
,
Nieto-Castanon
A
.
Conn: a functional connectivity toolbox for correlated and anticorrelated brain networks
.
Brain Connect
2012
;
2
:
125
141
25.
Behzadi
Y
,
Restom
K
,
Liau
J
,
Liu
TT
.
A component based noise correction method (CompCor) for BOLD and perfusion based fMRI
.
Neuroimage
2007
;
37
:
90
101
26.
Dale
AM
,
Fischl
B
,
Sereno
MI
.
Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction
.
Neuroimage
1999
;
9
:
179
194
27.
Kong
Q
,
Li
T
,
Reddy
S
,
Hodges
S
,
Kong
J
.
Brain stimulation targets for chronic pain: Insights from meta-analysis, functional connectivity and literature review
.
Neurotherapeutics
2023
;
21
:
e00297
28.
Apkarian
AV
,
Bushnell
MC
,
Treede
R-D
,
Zubieta
J-K
.
Human brain mechanisms of pain perception and regulation in health and disease
.
Eur J Pain
2005
;
9
:
463
484
29.
Groh
A
,
Krieger
P
,
Mease
RA
,
Henderson
L
.
Acute and chronic pain processing in the thalamocortical system of humans and animal models
.
Neuroscience
2018
;
387
:
58
71
30.
Alshelh
Z
,
Di Pietro
F
,
Youssef
AM
, et al
.
Chronic neuropathic pain: it's about the rhythm
.
J Neurosci
2016
;
36
:
1008
1018
31.
Di Pietro
F
,
Lee
B
,
Henderson
LA
.
Altered resting activity patterns and connectivity in individuals with complex regional pain syndrome
.
Hum Brain Mapp
2020
;
41
:
3781
3793
32.
Selvarajah
D
,
Wilkinson
ID
,
Gandhi
R
,
Griffiths
PD
,
Tesfaye
S
.
Microvascular perfusion abnormalities of the thalamus in painful but not painless diabetic polyneuropathy: a clue to the pathogenesis of pain in type 1 diabetes
.
Diabetes Care
2011
;
34
:
718
720
33.
Sloan
G
,
Anton
A
,
Caunt
S
,
Wilkinson
I
,
Selvarajah
D
,
Tesfaye
S
.
Higher sensory cortical energy metabolism in painful diabetic neuropathy: evidence from a cerebral magnetic resonance spectroscopy study
.
Diabetes
2023
;
72
:
1028
1034
34.
Demant
DT
,
Lund
K
,
Vollert
J
, et al
.
The effect of oxcarbazepine in peripheral neuropathic pain depends on pain phenotype: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phenotype-stratified study
.
Pain
2014
;
155
:
2263
2273
35.
Sloan
G
,
Selvarajah
D
,
Tesfaye
S
.
Pathogenesis, diagnosis and clinical management of diabetic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy
.
Nat Rev Endocrinol
2021
;
17
:
400
420
36.
Tracey
I
,
Woolf
CJ
,
Andrews
NA
.
Composite pain biomarker signatures for objective assessment and effective treatment
.
Neuron
2019
;
101
:
783
800
37.
Watanabe
K
,
Hirano
S
,
Kojima
K
, et al
.
Altered cerebral blood flow in the anterior cingulate cortex is associated with neuropathic pain
.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry
2018
;
89
:
1082
1087
38.
Smitha
KA
,
Akhil Raja
K
,
Arun
KM
, et al
.
Resting state fMRI: a review on methods in resting state connectivity analysis and resting state networks
.
Neuroradiol J
2017
;
30
:
305
317
39.
Teh
K
,
Armitage
P
,
Tesfaye
S
,
Selvarajah
D
.
Deep learning classification of treatment response in diabetic painful neuropathy: a combined machine learning and magnetic resonance neuroimaging methodological study
.
Neuroinformatics
2023
;
21
:
35
43
40.
Chen
X
,
Spaeth
RB
,
Freeman
SG
, et al
.
The modulation effect of longitudinal acupuncture on resting state functional connectivity in knee osteoarthritis patients
.
Mol Pain
2015
;
11
:
67
41.
Harris
RE
,
Napadow
V
,
Huggins
JP
, et al
.
Pregabalin rectifies aberrant brain chemistry, connectivity, and functional response in chronic pain patients
.
Anesthesiology
2013
;
119
:
1453
1464
42.
Flodin
P
,
Martinsen
S
,
Mannerkorpi
K
, et al
.
Normalization of aberrant resting state functional connectivity in fibromyalgia patients following a three month physical exercise therapy
.
Neuroimage Clin
2015
;
9
:
134
139
Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at https://www.diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.