1
|
Ettcheto M, Sánchez-Lopez E, Cano A, Carrasco M, Herrera K, Manzine PR, Espinosa-Jimenez T, Busquets O, Verdaguer E, Olloquequi J, Auladell C, Folch J, Camins A. Dexibuprofen ameliorates peripheral and central risk factors associated with Alzheimer's disease in metabolically stressed APPswe/PS1dE9 mice. Cell Biosci 2021; 11:141. [PMID: 34294142 PMCID: PMC8296685 DOI: 10.1186/s13578-021-00646-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several studies stablished a relationship between metabolic disturbances and Alzheimer´s disease (AD) where inflammation plays a pivotal role. However, mechanisms involved still remain unclear. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate central and peripheral effects of dexibuprofen (DXI) in the progression of AD in APPswe/PS1dE9 (APP/PS1) female mice, a familial AD model, fed with high fat diet (HFD). Animals were fed either with conventional chow or with HFD, from their weaning until their sacrifice, at 6 months. Moreover, mice were divided into subgroups to which were administered drinking water or water supplemented with DXI (20 mg kg-1 d-1) for 3 months. Before sacrifice, body weight, intraperitoneal glucose and insulin tolerance test (IP-ITT) were performed to evaluate peripheral parameters and also behavioral tests to determine cognitive decline. Moreover, molecular studies such as Western blot and RT-PCR were carried out in liver to confirm metabolic effects and in hippocampus to analyze several pathways considered hallmarks in AD. RESULTS Our studies demonstrate that DXI improved metabolic alterations observed in transgenic animals fed with HFD in vivo, data in accordance with those obtained at molecular level. Moreover, an improvement of cognitive decline and neuroinflammation among other alterations associated with AD were observed such as beta-amyloid plaque accumulation and unfolded protein response. CONCLUSIONS Collectively, evidence suggest that chronic administration of DXI prevents the progression of AD through the regulation of inflammation which contribute to improve hallmarks of this pathology. Thus, this compound could constitute a novel therapeutic approach in the treatment of AD in a combined therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miren Ettcheto
- Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain.
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
- Unitat de Farmacologia I Farmacognòsia, Facultat de Farmàcia I Ciències de L'Alimentació, Universitat de Barcelona, Av. Joan XXIII 27/31, 08028, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Elena Sánchez-Lopez
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (IN2UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology and Physical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Amanda Cano
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (IN2UB), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Technology and Physical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Research Center and Memory Clinic, Fundació ACE. Institut Català de Neurociències Aplicades - International University of Catalunya (UIC), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marina Carrasco
- Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Faculty of Medicine and Life Science, University Rovira I Virgili, Reus, Spain
| | - Katherine Herrera
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Cellular Biology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Biology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Patricia R Manzine
- Department of Gerontology, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, 13565-905, Brazil
| | - Triana Espinosa-Jimenez
- Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Oriol Busquets
- Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neurosciences, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York City (10461), USA
| | - Ester Verdaguer
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Cellular Biology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Biology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jordi Olloquequi
- Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Pathology, Facultad de Ciencias de La Salud, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Talca, Chile
| | - Carme Auladell
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Cellular Biology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Biology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jaume Folch
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Faculty of Medicine and Life Science, University Rovira I Virgili, Reus, Spain
| | - Antoni Camins
- Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Biomedical Research Networking Centre in Neurodegenerative Diseases (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain
- Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hung KKC, Graham CA, Lo RSL, Leung YK, Leung LY, Man SY, Woo WK, Cattermole GN, Rainer TH. Oral paracetamol and/or ibuprofen for treating pain after soft tissue injuries: Single centre double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0192043. [PMID: 29408866 PMCID: PMC5800651 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2017] [Accepted: 01/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Soft tissue injuries commonly present to the emergency department (ED), often with acute pain. They cause significant suffering and morbidity if not adequately treated. Paracetamol and ibuprofen are commonly used analgesics, but it remains unknown if either one or the combination of both is superior for pain control. OBJECTIVES To investigate the analgesic effect of paracetamol, ibuprofen and the combination of both in the treatment of soft tissue injury in an ED, and the side effect profile of these drugs. METHODS Double-blind, double dummy, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial. 782 adult patients presenting with soft tissue injury without obvious fractures attending the ED of a university hospital in the New Territories of Hong Kong were recruited. Patients were randomised using a random number table into three parallel arms of paracetamol only, ibuprofen only and a combination of paracetamol and ibuprofen in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary outcome measure was pain score at rest and on activity in the first 2 hours and first 3 days. Data was analysed on an intention to treat basis. RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference in pain score in the initial two hours between the three groups, and no clinically significant difference in pain score in the first three days. CONCLUSION There was no difference in analgesic effects or side effects observed using oral paracetamol, ibuprofen or a combination of both in patients with mild to moderate pain after soft tissue injuries attending the ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00528658).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin K. C. Hung
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Colin A. Graham
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Ronson S. L. Lo
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Yuk Ki Leung
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Ling Yan Leung
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - S. Y. Man
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - W. K. Woo
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Giles N. Cattermole
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| | - Timothy H. Rainer
- Accident and Emergency Medicine Academic Unit, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Moore RA, Wiffen PJ, Derry S, Maguire T, Roy YM, Tyrrell L. Non-prescription (OTC) oral analgesics for acute pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015:CD010794. [PMID: 26544675 PMCID: PMC6485506 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010794.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Non-prescription (over-the-counter, or OTC) analgesics (painkillers) are used frequently. They are available in various brands, package sizes, formulations, and dose. They can be used for a range of different types of pain, but this overview reports on how well they work for acute pain (pain of short duration, usually with rapid onset). Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the analgesic efficacy of individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain. OBJECTIVES To examine published Cochrane reviews for information about the efficacy of pain medicines available without prescription using data from acute postoperative pain. METHODS We identified OTC analgesics available in the UK, Australia, Canada, and the USA by examining online pharmacy websites. We also included some analgesics (diclofenac potassium, dexketoprofen, dipyrone) of importance in parts of the world, but not currently available in these jurisdictions.We identified systematic reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) on The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group, had a standard title, and had as their primary outcome numbers of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. From individual reviews we extracted the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) for this outcome for each drug/dose combination, and also calculated the success rate to achieve at least 50% of maximum pain relief. We also examined the number of participants experiencing any adverse event, and whether the incidence was different from placebo. MAIN RESULTS We found information on 21 different OTC analgesic drugs, doses, and formulations, using information from 10 Cochrane reviews, supplemented by information from one non-Cochrane review with additional information on ibuprofen formulations (high quality evidence). The lowest (best) NNT values were for combinations of ibuprofen plus paracetamol, with NNT values below 2. Analgesics with values close to 2 included fast acting formulations of ibuprofen 200 mg and 400 mg, ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and diclofenac potassium 50 mg. Combinations of ibuprofen plus paracetamol had success rates of almost 70%, with dipyrone 500 mg, fast acting ibuprofen formulations 200 mg and 400 mg, ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and diclofenac potassium 50 mg having success rates above 50%. Paracetamol and aspirin at various doses had NNT values of 3 or above, and success rates of 11% to 43%. We found no information on many of the commonly available low dose codeine combinations.The proportion of participants experiencing an adverse event were generally not different from placebo, except for aspirin 1000 mg and (barely) ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg. For ibuprofen plus paracetamol, adverse event rates were lower than with placebo. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is a body of reliable evidence about the efficacy of some of the most commonly available drugs and doses widely available without prescription. The postoperative pain model is predominantly pain after third molar extraction, which is used as the industry model for everyday pain. The proportion of people with acute pain who get good pain relief with any of them ranges from around 70% at best to less than 20% at worst; low doses of some drugs in fast acting formulations were among the best. Adverse events were generally no different from placebo. Consumers can make an informed choice based on this knowledge, together with availability and price. Headache and migraine were not included in this overview.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Terry Maguire
- Queen's University BelfastSchool of PharmacyBelfastUK
| | - Yvonne M Roy
- Pain Research UnitCochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care GroupThe Churchill HospitalOld RoadOxfordUKOX3 7LE
| | - Laila Tyrrell
- Pain Research UnitCochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care GroupThe Churchill HospitalOld RoadOxfordUKOX3 7LE
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Wiffen PJ. Adverse events associated with single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults - an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015:CD011407. [PMID: 26461263 PMCID: PMC6485338 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011407.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an update of a Cochrane overview published in Issue 9, 2011; that overview considered both efficacy and adverse events. This overview considers adverse events, with efficacy dealt with in a separate overview.Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the adverse events associated with individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain. This overview brings together the results of those individual reviews. OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of adverse event rates associated with single-dose oral analgesics, compared with placebo, for acute postoperative pain in adults. METHODS We identified systematic reviews in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group. We extracted information related to participants experiencing any adverse event, and reports of serious adverse events, and deaths from the individual reviews. MAIN RESULTS Information was available from 39 Cochrane reviews for 41 different analgesics or analgesic combinations (51 drug/dose/formulations) tested in single oral doses in participants with moderate or severe postoperative pain. This involved around 350 unique studies involving about 35,000 participants. Most studies involved younger participants with pain following removal of molar teeth.For most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), paracetamol, and combinations not containing opioids, there were few examples where participants experienced significantly more or fewer adverse events than with placebo. For aspirin 1000 mg and diflunisal 1000 mg, opioids, or fixed-dose combination drugs containing opioids, participants typically experienced significantly more adverse events than with placebo. Studies of combinations of ibuprofen and paracetamol reported significantly fewer adverse events.Serious adverse events were rare, occurring a rate of about 1 in 3200 participants.Most reviews did not report specific adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Despite ongoing problems with the measurement, recording, and reporting of adverse events in clinical trials and in systematic reviews, the large amount of information available for single oral doses of analgesics provides evidence that adverse events rates are generally similar with active drug and placebo in these circumstances, except at higher doses of some drugs, and in combinations including opioids.
Collapse
|
5
|
Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Wiffen PJ. Single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults - an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015:CD008659. [PMID: 26414123 PMCID: PMC6485441 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008659.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 88] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an updated version of the original Cochrane overview published in Issue 9, 2011. That overview considered both efficacy and adverse events, but adverse events are now dealt with in a separate overview.Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the analgesic efficacy of individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain. This overview brings together the results of those individual reviews and assesses the reliability of available data. OBJECTIVES To summarise the efficacy of pharmaceutical interventions for acute pain in adults with at least moderate pain following surgery who have been given a single dose of oral analgesic. METHODS We identified systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group, had a standard title, and had as their primary outcome the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. For individual reviews, we extracted the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) for this outcome for each drug/dose combination, and also the percentage of participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief, the mean of mean or median time to remedication, and the percentage of participants remedicating by six, eight, 12, or 24 hours. Where there was adequate information for pairs of drug and dose (at least 200 participants, in at least two studies), we defined the addition of four comparisons of typical size (400 participants in total) with zero effect as making the result potentially subject to publication bias and therefore unreliable. MAIN RESULTS The overview included 39 separate Cochrane Reviews with 41 analyses of single dose oral analgesics tested in acute postoperative pain models, with results from about 50,000 participants in approximately 460 individual studies. The individual reviews included only high-quality trials of standardised design, methods, and efficacy outcome reporting. No statistical comparison was undertaken.Reliable results (high quality information) were obtained for 53 pairs of drug and dose in painful postsurgical conditions; these included various fixed dose combinations, and fast acting formulations of some analgesics. NNTs varied from about 1.5 to 20 for at least 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. The proportion of participants achieving this level of benefit varied from about 30% to over 70%, and the time to remedication varied from two hours (placebo) to over 20 hours. Good (low) NNTs were obtained with ibuprofen 200 mg plus paracetamol (acetaminophen) 500 mg (NNT compared with placebo 1.6; 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 1.8), ibuprofen fast acting 200 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 2.3); ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 3.1), diclofenac potassium 50 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 2.5), and etoricoxib 120 mg (1.8; 1.7 to 2.0). For comparison, ibuprofen acid 400 mg had an NNT of 2.5 (2.4 to 2.6). Not all participants had good pain relief and, for many pairs of drug and dose, 50% or more did not achieve at least 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours.Long duration of action (eight hours or greater) was found for etoricoxib 120 mg, diflunisal 500 mg, paracetamol 650 mg plus oxycodone 10 mg, naproxen 500/550 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, and ibuprofen 400 mg plus paracetamol 1000 mg.There was no evidence of analgesic effect for aceclofenac 150 mg, aspirin 500 mg, and oxycodone 5 mg (low quality evidence). No trial data were available in reviews of acemetacin, meloxicam, nabumetone, nefopam, sulindac, tenoxicam, and tiaprofenic acid. Inadequate amounts of data were available for nine drugs and doses, and data potentially susceptible to publication bias for 13 drugs and doses (very low quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is a wealth of reliable evidence on the analgesic efficacy of single dose oral analgesics. Fast acting formulations and fixed dose combinations of analgesics can produce good and often long-lasting analgesia at relatively low doses. There is also important information on drugs for which there are no data, inadequate data, or where results are unreliable due to susceptibility to publication bias. This should inform choices by professionals and consumers.
Collapse
|
6
|
Derry S, Best J, Moore RA. Single dose oral dexibuprofen [S(+)-ibuprofen] for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 2013:CD007550. [PMID: 24151035 PMCID: PMC6485930 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd007550.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review is an update of a previously published review in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 3, 2009 on single dose oral dexibuprofen (S(+)-ibuprofen) for acute postoperative pain in adults.Dexibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) licensed for use in rheumatic disease and other musculoskeletal disorders in the UK, and widely available in other countries worldwide. It is an active isomer of ibuprofen. This review sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral dexibuprofen in acute postoperative pain, using clinical studies in patients with established pain, and with outcomes measured primarily over four to six hours, using standard methods. This type of study has been used for many decades to establish that drugs have analgesic properties. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose oral dexibuprofen for acute postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised studies using almost identical methods and outcomes. SEARCH METHODS Searches were run for the original review in 2009 and subsequent searches have been run in August 2013. We did not find any new published studies as a result of the updated search.We searched for randomised studies of dexibuprofen in acute postoperative pain in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (The Cochrane LIbrary), and for clinical trial reports and synopses of published and unpublished studies from Internet sources. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies of oral dexibuprofen for relief of acute postoperative pain in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We extracted pain relief or pain intensity data and converted it into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours, from which relative risk and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. We collected information on adverse events and withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS New data were identified for this update in one unpublished trial synopsis (BR1160 1995) in addition to the single study (Dionne 1998) that was included in the original review. In both studies dexibuprofen gave high levels of response, with 51/96 (53%) participants experiencing at least 50% pain relief with dexibuprofen 200 mg and 35/50 (70%) with dexibuprofen 400 mg, compared with 75/147 (51%) with racemic ibuprofen 400 mg, and 12/62 (13%) with placebo. The numbers of participants was too small to calculate NNTs with any meaning. The median time to additional analgesic use was greater than four hours for all active therapies, but about two hours for placebo.Adverse events were generally of mild or moderate intensity and consistent with events normally associated with anaesthesia and surgery. There were no serious adverse events or deaths.Additional data did not alter the conclusions from the earlier review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The information from these two studies in acute postoperative pain suggested that dexibuprofen may be a useful analgesic, but at doses not very different from racemic ibuprofen, for which considerably more evidence exists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jessica Best
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical NeurosciencesChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Oertel BG, Lötsch J. Clinical pharmacology of analgesics assessed with human experimental pain models: bridging basic and clinical research. Br J Pharmacol 2013; 168:534-53. [PMID: 23082949 DOI: 10.1111/bph.12023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2012] [Revised: 08/27/2012] [Accepted: 09/07/2012] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
The medical impact of pain is such that much effort is being applied to develop novel analgesic drugs directed towards new targets and to investigate the analgesic efficacy of known drugs. Ongoing research requires cost-saving tools to translate basic science knowledge into clinically effective analgesic compounds. In this review we have re-examined the prediction of clinical analgesia by human experimental pain models as a basis for model selection in phase I studies. The overall prediction of analgesic efficacy or failure of a drug correlated well between experimental and clinical settings. However, correct model selection requires more detailed information about which model predicts a particular clinical pain condition. We hypothesized that if an analgesic drug was effective in an experimental pain model and also a specific clinical pain condition, then that model might be predictive for that particular condition and should be selected for development as an analgesic for that condition. The validity of the prediction increases with an increase in the numbers of analgesic drug classes for which this agreement was shown. From available evidence, only five clinical pain conditions were correctly predicted by seven different pain models for at least three different drugs. Most of these models combine a sensitization method. The analysis also identified several models with low impact with respect to their clinical translation. Thus, the presently identified agreements and non-agreements between analgesic effects on experimental and on clinical pain may serve as a solid basis to identify complex sets of human pain models that bridge basic science with clinical pain research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bruno Georg Oertel
- Fraunhofer Project Group Translational Medicine and Pharmacology (IME-TMP), Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Thirty-five Cochrane Reviews of randomised trials testing the analgesic efficacy of individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain have been published. This overview brings together the results of all those reviews and assesses the reliability of available data. OBJECTIVES To summarise data from all Cochrane Reviews that have assessed the effects of pharmaceutical interventions for acute pain in adults with at least moderate pain following surgery, who have been given a single dose of oral analgesic taken alone. METHODS We identified systematic reviews in The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single Review Group, had a standard title, and had as their primary outcome numbers of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. For individual reviews we extracted the number needed to treat (NNT) for this outcome for each drug/dose combination, and also the percentage of participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief, the mean of mean or median time to remedication, the percentage of participants remedicating by 6, 8, 12, or 24 hours, and results for participants experiencing at least one adverse event. MAIN RESULTS The overview included 35 separate Cochrane Reviews with 38 analyses of single dose oral analgesics tested in acute postoperative pain models, with results from about 45,000 participants studied in approximately 350 individual studies. The individual reviews included only high-quality trials of standardised design and outcome reporting. The reviews used standardised methods and reporting for both efficacy and harm. Event rates with placebo were consistent in larger data sets. No statistical comparison was undertaken.There were reviews but no trial data were available for acemetacin, meloxicam, nabumetone, nefopam, sulindac, tenoxicam, and tiaprofenic acid. Inadequate amounts of data were available for dexibuprofen, dextropropoxyphene 130 mg, diflunisal 125 mg, etoricoxib 60 mg, fenbufen, and indometacin. Where there was adequate information for drug/dose combinations (at least 200 participants, in at least two studies), we defined the addition of four comparisons of typical size (400 participants in total) with zero effect as making the result potentially subject to publication bias and therefore unreliable. Reliable results were obtained for 46 drug/dose combinations in all painful postsurgical conditions; 45 in dental pain and 14 in other painful conditions.NNTs varied from about 1.5 to 20 for at least 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. The proportion of participants achieving this level of benefit varied from about 30% to over 70%, and the time to remedication varied from two hours (placebo) to over 20 hours in the same pain condition. Participants reporting at least one adverse event were few and generally no different between active drug and placebo, with a few exceptions, principally for aspirin and opioids.Drug/dose combinations with good (low) NNTs were ibuprofen 400 mg (2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4 to 2.6), diclofenac 50 mg (2.7; 95% CI 2.4 to 3.0), etoricoxib 120 mg (1.9; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.1), codeine 60 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg (2.2; 95% CI 1.8 to 2.9), celecoxib 400 mg (2.5; 95% CI 2.2 to 2.9), and naproxen 500/550 mg (2.7; 95% CI 2.3 to 3.3). Long duration of action (≥ 8 hours) was found for etoricoxib 120 mg, diflunisal 500 mg, oxycodone 10 mg + paracetamol 650 mg, naproxen 500/550 mg, and celecoxib 400 mg.Not all participants had good pain relief and for many drug/dose combinations 50% or more did not achieve at last 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is a wealth of reliable evidence on the analgesic efficacy of single dose oral analgesics. There is also important information on drugs for which there are no data, inadequate data, or where results are unreliable due to susceptibility to publication bias. This should inform choices by professionals and consumers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Andrew Moore
- Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LJ
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|