Advertisement

A Review of the Use of the Number Needed to Treat to Evaluate the Efficacy of Analgesics

Published:October 29, 2014DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2014.08.005

      Highlights

      • The NNT has become widely used to compare the efficacy of chronic pain treatments.
      • But the NNT is associated with distortions in calculation (eg, infinite values).
      • The NNT also requires selecting cutoffs, thus changing with the cutoff.
      • The NNT is also difficult to interpret, even by medical professionals.
      • Clinicians should be aware of these issues to calculate, use, and interpret the NNT.

      Abstract

      Standardized measures of efficacy are needed to compare analgesic efficacy across trials. The number needed to treat (NNT) is considered a statistically robust and readily interpretable measure to rank the efficacy of treatments, including analgesics. The NNT has become widely utilized to compare the efficacy of chronic pain treatments, helping physicians make treatment decisions and informing decisions for market access, reimbursement, and treatment guidelines. However, the NNT is associated with specific weaknesses in calculation and interpretation not associated with other methods for integrating trial data. These weaknesses include distortions in calculation as placebo effects approach treatment effects, with the possibility of infinite values; difficulties in estimating the NNT's confidence interval; and difficulties in interpretation. The NNT also requires selecting cutoffs of the original variable for dichotomization, with the NNT often changing depending on the cutoff. The NNT also suffers from problems common to other placebo-adjusted endpoints, including being sensitive to study-related and external factors (eg, year of publication). Therefore, clinicians and other stakeholders need to be aware of these issues to correctly calculate, use, and interpret the NNT. Nevertheless, efficacy, as measured by any variable, is only one aspect of a treatment to be considered in determining its place in therapy.

      Perspective

      The NNT has become widely utilized to compare the efficacy of chronic pain treatments. This article reviews the uses of the NNT and the potential problems associated with its calculation, use, and interpretation. Clinicians should be aware of these issues when interpreting clinical trial data based on the NNT.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The Journal of Pain
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Altman D.G.
        Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat.
        Br Med J. 1998; 317: 1309-1312
        • Altman D.G.
        • Deeks J.J.
        Meta-analysis, Simpson's paradox, and the number needed to treat.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002; 2: 3
        • Backonja M.
        • Wallace M.S.
        • Blonsky E.R.
        • Cutler B.J.
        • Malan Jr., P.
        • Rauck R.
        • Tobias J.
        NGX-4010 C116 Study Group: NGX-4010, a high-concentration capsaicin patch, for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: a randomised, double-blind study.
        Lancet Neurol. 2008; 7: 1106-1112
        • Black H.R.
        • Crocitto M.T.
        Number needed to treat: Solid science or a path to pernicious rationing?.
        Am J Hypertens. 1998; 11 (discussion 135S-137S): 128S-134S
        • Caro J.J.
        • Ishak K.J.
        • Caro I.
        • Migliaccio-Walle K.
        • Klittich W.S.
        Comparing medications in a therapeutic area using an NNT model.
        Value Health. 2004; 7: 585-594
        • Cates C.J.
        Simpson's paradox and calculation of number needed to treat from meta-analysis.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002; 2: 1
        • Christensen P.M.
        • Brøsen K.
        • Brixen K.
        • Andersen M.
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        A randomized trial of laypersons' perception of benefit of osteoporosis therapy: Number needed to treat versus postponement of hip fracture.
        Clin Ther. 2003; 25: 2575-2585
        • Christensen P.M.
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        Number-needed-to-treat (NNT)—Needs treatment with care.
        Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2006; 99: 12-16
        • Citrome L.
        Compelling or irrelevant? Using number needed to treat can help decide.
        Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2008; 117: 412-419
        • Dowie J.
        The “number needed to treat” and the “adjusted NNT” in health care decision-making.
        J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998; 3: 44-49
        • Drewes A.M.
        • Andreasen A.
        • Poulsen L.H.
        Valproate for treatment of chronic central pain after spinal cord injury. A double-blind cross-over study.
        Paraplegia. 1994; 32: 565-569
        • Dworkin R.H.
        • Turk D.C.
        • Peirce-Sandner S.
        • Burke L.B.
        • Farrar J.T.
        • Gilron I.
        • Jensen M.P.
        • Katz N.P.
        • Raja S.N.
        • Rappaport B.A.
        • Rowbotham M.C.
        • Backonja M.M.
        • Baron R.
        • Bellamy N.
        • Bhagwagar Z.
        • Costello A.
        • Cowan P.
        • Fang W.C.
        • Hertz S.
        • Jay G.W.
        • Junor R.
        • Kerns R.D.
        • Kerwin R.
        • Kopecky E.A.
        • Lissin D.
        • Malamut R.
        • Markman J.D.
        • McDermott M.P.
        • Munera C.
        • Porter L.
        • Rauschkolb C.
        • Rice A.S.
        • Sampaio C.
        • Skljarevski V.
        • Sommerville K.
        • Stacey B.R.
        • Steigerwald I.
        • Tobias J.
        • Trentacosti A.M.
        • Wasan A.D.
        • Wells G.A.
        • Williams J.
        • Witter J.
        • Ziegler D.
        Considerations for improving assay sensitivity in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.
        Pain. 2012; 153: 1148-1158
        • Ebrahim S.
        The use of numbers needed to treat derived from systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Caveats and pitfalls.
        Eval Health Prof. 2001; 24: 152-164
        • Edelsberg J.
        • Oster G.
        Summary measures of number needed to treat: How much clinical guidance do they provide in neuropathic pain?.
        Eur J Pain. 2009; 13: 11-16
        • Fedorov V.
        • Mannino F.
        • Zhang R.
        Consequences of dichotomization.
        Pharm Stat. 2009; 8: 50-61
        • Finnerup N.B.
        • Otto M.
        • McQuay H.J.
        • Jensen T.S.
        • Sindrup S.H.
        Algorithm for neuropathic pain treatment: An evidence based proposal.
        Pain. 2005; 118: 289-305
        • Finnerup N.B.
        • Sindrup S.H.
        • Bach F.W.
        • Johannesen I.L.
        • Jensen T.S.
        Lamotrigine in spinal cord injury pain: A randomized controlled trial.
        Pain. 2002; 96: 375-383
        • Finnerup N.B.
        • Sindrup S.H.
        • Jensen T.S.
        The evidence for pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain.
        Pain. 2010; 150: 573-581
        • Gilron I.
        • Bailey J.M.
        • Tu D.
        • Holden R.R.
        • Weaver D.F.
        • Houlden R.L.
        Morphine, gabapentin, or their combination for neuropathic pain.
        N Engl J Med. 2005; 352: 1324-1334
        • Halvorsen P.A.
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        Decisions on drug therapies by numbers needed to treat: A randomized trial.
        Arch Intern Med. 2005; 165: 1140-1146
        • Halvorsen P.A.
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        • Aasland O.G.
        • Førde O.H.
        Medical doctors' perception of the “number needed to treat” (NNT).
        Scand J Prim Health Care. 2003; 21: 162-166
        • Hutton J.L.
        Misleading statistics: The problems surrounding number needed to treat and number needed to harm.
        Pharm Med. 2010; 24: 145-149
        • Hutton J.L.
        Number needed to treat and number needed to harm are not the best way to report and assess the results of randomised clinical trials.
        Br J Haematol. 2009; 146: 27-30
        • Hutton J.L.
        Number needed to treat: Properties and problems.
        J R Statist Soc A. 2000; 163: 403-419
        • Katz N.
        Methodological issues in clinical trials of opioids for chronic pain.
        Neurology. 2005; 65: S32-49
        • Katz J.
        • Finnerup N.B.
        • Dworkin R.H.
        Clinical trial outcome in neuropathic pain: Relationship to study characteristics.
        Neurology. 2008; 70: 263-272
        • Killian J.M.
        • Fromm G.H.
        Carbamazepine in the treatment of neuralgia. Use of side effects.
        Arch Neurol. 1968; 19: 129-136
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        • Gyrd-Hansen D.
        • Nexø J.
        • Nielsen J.B.
        Number needed to treat: Easily understood and intuitively meaningful? Theoretical considerations and a randomised trial.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2002; 55: 888-892
        • Laupacis A.
        • Sackett D.L.
        • Roberts R.S.
        An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment.
        N Engl J Med. 1988; 318: 1728-1733
        • Lesaffre E.
        • Pledger G.
        A note on the number needed to treat.
        Control Clin Trials. 1999; 20: 439-447
        • Mayne T.J.
        • Whalen E.
        • Vu A.
        Annualized was found better than absolute risk reduction in the calculation of number needed to treat in chronic conditions.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59: 217-223
        • McAlister F.A.
        The “number needed to treat” turns 20—and continues to be used and misused.
        CMAJ. 2008; 179: 549-553
      1. Moore RA: What Is an NNT? In “What Is… Series.” April 2009. Available at: http://www.whatisseries.co.uk/whatis/pdfs/What_is_an_NNT.pdf

        • Moore R.A.
        Pain and systematic reviews.
        Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2001; 45: 1136-1139
        • Moore R.A.
        • Moore O.A.
        • Derry S.
        • McQuay H.J.
        Numbers needed to treat calculated from responder rates give a better indication of efficacy in osteoarthritis trials than mean pain scores.
        Arthritis Res Ther. 2008; 10: R39
        • Moore R.A.
        • Straube S.
        • Wiffen P.J.
        • Derry S.
        • McQuay H.J.
        Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009; 3: CD007076
        • Newcombe R.G.
        Know your limitations: Not just for clinicians: Estimation of confidence intervals is not straightforward.
        J Public Health Med. 1999; 21: 481-482
        • Newcombe R.G.
        Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. Absolute risk reduction is less likely to be misunderstood.
        BMJ. 1999; 318: 1765-1767
        • Nexø J.
        • Gyrd-Hansen D.
        • Kragstrup J.
        • Kristiansen I.S.
        • Nielsen J.B.
        Danish GPs' perception of disease risk and benefit of prevention.
        Fam Pract. 2002; 19: 3-6
        • Otto M.
        • Bach F.W.
        • Jensen T.S.
        • Sindrup S.H.
        Valproic acid has no effect on pain in polyneuropathy: A randomized controlled trial.
        Neurology. 2004; 62: 285-288
        • Raskin P.
        • Donofrio P.D.
        • Rosenthal N.R.
        • Hewitt D.J.
        • Jordan D.M.
        • Xiang J.
        • Vinik A.I.
        Topiramate vs placebo in painful diabetic neuropathy: Analgesic and metabolic effects.
        Neurology. 2004; 63: 865-873
        • Serpell M.G.
        Gabapentin in neuropathic pain syndromes: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
        Pain. 2002; 99: 557-566
        • Sheridan S.L.
        • Pignone M.P.
        Numeracy and the medical student's ability to interpret data.
        Eff Clin Pract. 2002; 5: 35-40
        • Sheridan S.L.
        • Pignone M.P.
        • Lewis C.L.
        A randomized comparison of patient's understanding of number needed to treat and other risk reduction formats.
        J Gen Intern Med. 2003; 18: 884-892
        • Simpson D.A.
        Gabapentin and venlafaxine for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy.
        J Clin Neuromuscul Dis. 2001; 3: 53-62
        • Simpson D.M.
        • McArthur J.C.
        • Olney R.
        • Clifford D.
        • So Y.
        • Ross D.
        • Baird B.J.
        • Barrett P.
        • Hammer A.E.
        Lamotrigine for HIV-associated painful sensory neuropathies: A placebo-controlled trial.
        Neurology. 2003; 60: 1508-1514
        • Smeeth L.
        • Haines A.
        • Ebrahim S.
        Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses sometimes informative, usually misleading.
        BMJ. 1999; 318: 1548-1551
        • Stang A.
        • Poole C.
        • Bender R.
        Common problems related to the use of number needed to treat.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63: 820-825
        • Suissa D.
        • Brassard P.
        • Smiechowski B.
        • Suissa S.
        Number needed to treat is incorrect without proper time-related considerations.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2012; 65: 42-46
        • Thabane L.
        A closer look at the distribution of number needed to treat (NNT): a Bayesian approach.
        Biostatistics. 2003; 4: 365-370
        • Tramèr M.R.
        • Walder B.
        Number needed to treat (or harm).
        World J Surg. 2005; 29: 576-581
        • Walsh B.T.
        • Seidman S.N.
        • Sysko R.
        • Gould M.
        Placebo response in studies of major depression: Variable, substantial, and growing.
        JAMA. 2002; 287: 1840-1847
        • Webster L.R.
        • Malan T.P.
        • Tuchman M.M.
        • Mollen M.D.
        • Tobias J.K.
        • Vanhove G.F.
        A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled dose finding study of NGX-4010, a high-concentration capsaicin patch, for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia.
        J Pain. 2010; 11: 972-982
        • Wu L.A.
        • Kottke T.E.
        Number needed to treat: Caveat emptor.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54: 111-116
        • Zakrzewska J.M.
        • Chaudhry Z.
        • Nurmikko T.J.
        • Patton D.W.
        • Mullens E.L.
        Lamotrigine (Lamictal) in refractory trigeminal neuralgia: Results from a double-blind placebo controlled crossover trial.
        Pain. 1997; 73: 223-230