Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) may influence pain susceptibility and impact treatment response in pain‐related temporomandibular disorders (TMDp). Objective Explore the role of COMT (rs4646310, rs6269, rs4818, rs4680) and OPRM1 (rs1799971) genotypes in regulating treatment response. Methods Sixty TMDp patients (55 females and 5 males), diagnosed with the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD), underwent standardised treatment (information and education, home physical therapy, occlusal splint) for 6 months. Treatment outcomes included: pain intensity, pain‐free mouth opening, jaw functional limitation, depression, and anxiety. Genotyping for COMT and OPRM1 SNPs was performed using DNA from buccal mucosa swabs and TaqMan assays. Statistical analysis was carried out to compare the changes in treatment outcomes and the influence of genotypes on treatment response. Results Significantly less pain reduction was observed in minor allele carriers of rs4646310, and rs4680 compared to dominant homozygous ( p < .025). Minor allele carriers of rs1799971 and rs4646310 demonstrated worsening in pain‐free mouth opening while dominant homozygous exhibited improvement ( p < .025). Significantly less anxiety reduction was observed in minor allele carriers of rs4646310 compared to dominant homozygous ( p = .003). Of the all variables assessed in the regression model, carrying a minor allele of rs1799971 predicted a poorer treatment response considering pain‐free mouth opening while carrying a minor allele of rs4646310 predicted less pain and less anxiety reduction. Conclusion Our findings indicate that certain SNP variants of the COMT and OPRM1 genes were associated with poorer treatment response and may therefore play a significant role in the classification of TMDp patients. Also, assessment of patient genotype could potentially aid in predicting treatment response.
Zlendić et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: