A Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Evaluation of the Safety of Intravenous Meloxicam Following Major Surgery

Bioequivalence of Meloxicam Nanocrystal Injection in Healthy Chinese Volunteers

This single-center, randomized, open, two-preparation, single-dose, two-period, self-crossover trial aimed to assess the bioequivalence and safety of the test (T) preparation compared to the reference (R) preparation following intravenous injection in healthy subjects under fasting conditions. Twenty-four healthy subjects were enrolled in the study and subjects were randomly divided into two groups at a 1:1 ratio and were administered once per period, with an 8-day washout period. During each period, serum drug concentrations were detected for pharmacokinetic analysis and adverse events were recorded for safety analysis. The 90% confidence intervals for the geometric mean ratios (T:R) of maximum serum concentration, area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable concentration, and area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinite time fell within the predefined bioequivalence range of 80%-125%, indicating bioequivalence between the T and R preparation under fasting conditions. Additionally, four subjects (16.7%) experienced five instances of adverse events in the T group, while five subjects (21.7%) experienced five instances of adverse events in the R group. This trial indicated the potential bioequivalence between the T and R products under fasting conditions, based on pharmacokinetic and safety profile.

Budget Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Intravenous Meloxicam to Treat Moderate-Severe Postoperative Pain

INTRODUCTION

This study assesses the budget impact and cost-effectiveness of intravenous meloxicam (MIV) to treat moderate-severe acute postoperative pain in adults.

METHODS

A two-part Markov cohort model captured the pharmacoeconomic impact of MIV versus non-opioid intravenous analgesics (acetaminophen, ibuprofen, ketorolac) among a hypothetical adult cohort undergoing selected inpatient procedures and experiencing moderate-severe acute postoperative pain: Part 1 (postoperative hour 0 to discharge, cycled hourly), health states were defined by pain level. Pain transition rates, adverse event probabilities, and concomitant opioid utilization were derived from a network meta-analysis. Part 2 (discharge to week 52, cycled weekly), health states were defined by the presence/absence of pain-related readmission and opioid use disorder as determined by literature-based inputs relating to pain control outcomes. Healthcare utilization and direct medical costs were derived from an administrative claims database analysis. Primary outcomes were the incremental cost per member per month (PMPM) and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Scenario, univariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The model assumed a private payer perspective in the USA (no discounting, 2019 US$).

RESULTS

Modeled outcomes indicated MIV was associated with lower accumulated postoperative pain, fewer adverse events, and less opioid utilization for most procedures and comparators, with longer-term outcomes also generally favoring MIV. The budget impact of MIV was - $0.028 PMPM. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, MIV had lower costs and better outcomes for all comparisons except against ketorolac in orthopedic procedures where the former was cost-effective but not cost saving ($95,925/QALY). Scenario and sensitivity analyses indicated that modeled outcomes were robust to alternative inputs and underlying input uncertainty. Differences in direct medical costs were driven by reduced costs attributable to length of stay and opioid-related adverse drug events.

CONCLUSION

MIV was associated with modeled clinical and economic benefits compared to commonly used non-opioid intravenous analgesics.

Immune Modulatory Effects of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs in the Perioperative Period and Their Consequence on Postoperative Outcome

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are among the most commonly administered drugs in the perioperative period due to their prominent role in pain management. However, they potentially have perioperative consequences due to immune-modulating effects through the inhibition of prostanoid synthesis, thereby affecting the levels of various cytokines. These effects may have a direct impact on the postoperative outcome of patients since the immune system aims to restore homeostasis and plays an indispensable role in regeneration and repair. By affecting the immune response, consequences can be expected on various organ systems. This narrative review aims to highlight these potential immune system-related consequences, which include systemic inflammatory response syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome, immediate and persistent postoperative pain, effects on oncological and neurologic outcome, and wound, anastomotic, and bone healing.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of postsurgical pain

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pain is a distressful experience and remains to be a significant concern after surgery. Current agents either fail to prevent or minimize postoperative pain or cause a series of adverse effects, addiction, or abuse. Opioids have been the gold standard in the treatment of postoperative pain despite their well-described adverse effects. Many new agents with different mechanisms of action have been recently introduced to address this issue.

AREAS COVERED

This current review summarizes the list of new and emerging drugs investigated for their efficacy in controlling the postoperative pain and decreasing the need for rescue opioid use, adverse effect profile, abuse, and addiction potential.

EXPERT OPINION

Opioids have unrivaled analgesic efficacy. However adverse effects of opioids led to the search for better options. In mild pain most of the emerging drugs have been shown to control postoperative pain and decrease the use of rescue opioid, however fail to control pain after major surgeries causing severe pain. Specific agents such as Oliceridine, new local anesthetics, etc., are effective in controlling severe pain and hold a promise to replace opioids in the near future.

Economic Impact of Preoperative Meloxicam IV Administration in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Trial Sub-Study

We evaluated the economic impact associated with preoperative meloxicam IV 30 mg vs placebo administration among adult total knee arthroplasty (TKA) recipients enrolled in Phase IIIB NCT03434275 trial. Data on total hospital costs and length of stay (LOS) obtained from the trial were compared between meloxicam IV 30 mg and placebo groups. Patients in the meloxicam IV 30 mg vs placebo group (n = 93 vs 88) incurred an adjusted $2,266 (95% CI: -$1,035, $5,116; p = 0.1689) lower total hospital costs and an adjusted 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.0%, 18.1%; p = 0.1082) shorter LOS. While statistically non-significant, based on 95% CIs, the results from this sub-study may suggest a favorable impact associated with meloxicam IV 30 mg on hospital costs and LOS.

Safety and Efficacy of Perioperative Intravenous Meloxicam for Moderate-to-Severe Pain Management in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective

To evaluate the effect of perioperative meloxicam IV 30 mg on opioid consumption in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Design

Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Subjects

In total, 181 adults undergoing elective primary TKA.

Methods

Subjects received meloxicam 30 mg or placebo via an IV bolus every 24 hours, the first dose administered prior to surgery as part of a multimodal pain management protocol. The primary efficacy parameter was total opioid use from end of surgery through 24 hours.

Results

Meloxicam IV was associated with less opioid use versus placebo during the 24 hours after surgery (18.9 ± 1.32 vs 27.7 ± 1.37 mg IV morphine equivalent dose; P < 0.001) and was superior to placebo on secondary endpoints, including summed pain intensity (first dose to 24 hours postdosing, first dose to first assisted ambulation, and first dose to discharge) and opioid use (48–72 hrs., 0–48 hrs., 0–72 hrs., hour 0 to end of treatment, and the first 24 hours after discharge). Adverse events (AEs) were reported for 69.9% and 92.0% of the meloxicam IV and placebo groups, respectively; the most common AEs were nausea (40% vs. 59%), vomiting (16% vs 22%), hypotension (14% vs 15%), pruritus (15% vs 11%), and constipation (11% vs 13%).

Conclusions

Perioperative meloxicam IV 30 mg as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for elective primary TKA reduced opioid consumption in the 24-hour period after surgery versus placebo and was associated with a lower incidence of AEs typically associated with opioid use.

Meloxicam for intravenous use: review of its clinical efficacy and safety for management of postoperative pain

Meloxicam for intravenous use (meloxicam iv.) is a nanocrystal formulation with improved dissolution properties and shortened time to peak plasma concentrations versus oral meloxicam. In Phase III and IIIb trials, 30 mg once daily relieved pain following pre- or postoperative administration in orthopedic, abdominal and colorectal surgeries. Meloxicam iv. was associated with reduced opioid consumption, the clinical benefit of which remains unclear. The drug may be administered alone or in combination with other non-nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In Phase III trials, it demonstrated adverse event profile similar to placebo, with nausea, constipation, vomiting and headache occurring most frequently. Meloxicam iv. does not appear to adversely affect platelet function or wound-healing parameters. No new safety signals were detected in the Phase IIIb studies.

Efficacy of non-opioid analgesics to control postoperative pain: a network meta-analysis

Background

The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) Meloxicam 30 mg (MIV), an investigational non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), and certain other IV non-opioid analgesics for moderate-severe acute postoperative pain.

Methods

We searched PubMed and CENTRAL for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) (years 2000–2019, adult human subjects) of IV non-opioid analgesics (IV NSAIDs or IV Acetaminophen) used to treat acute pain after abdominal, hysterectomy, bunionectomy or orthopedic procedures. A Bayesian NMA was conducted in R to rank treatments based on the standardized mean differences in sum of pain intensity difference from baseline up to 24 h postoperatively (sum of pain intensity difference: SPID 24). The probability and the cumulative probability of rank for each treatment were calculated, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was applied to distinguish treatments on the basis of their outcomes such that higher SUCRA values indicate better outcomes. The study protocol was prospectively registered with by PROSPERO (CRD42019117360).

Results

Out of 2313 screened studies, 27 studies with 36 comparative observations were included, producing a treatment network that included the four non-opioid IV pain medications of interest (MIV, ketorolac, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen). MIV was associated with the largest SPID 24 for all procedure categories and comparators. The SUCRA ranking table indicated that MIV had the highest probability for the most effective treatment for abdominal (89.5%), bunionectomy (100%), and hysterectomy (99.8%). MIV was associated with significantly less MME utilization versus all comparators for abdominal procedures, hysterectomy, and versus acetaminophen in orthopedic procedures. Elsewhere MME utilization outcomes for MIV were largely equivalent or nominally better than other comparators. Odds of ORADEs were significantly higher for all comparators vs MIV for orthopedic (gastrointestinal) and hysterectomy (respiratory).

Conclusions

MIV 30 mg may provide better pain reduction with similar or better safety compared to other approved IV non-opioid analgesics. Caution is warranted in interpreting these results as all comparisons involving MIV were indirect.

Preoperative intravenous meloxicam for moderate-to-severe pain in the immediate post-operative period: a Phase IIIb randomized clinical trial in 55 patients undergoing primary open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery with bowel resection and/or anastomosis

Aim: Evaluate safety/efficacy of intravenous meloxicam in a colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. Methods: Adults undergoing primary open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery with bowel resection and/or anastomosis received meloxicam IV 30 mg (n = 27) or placebo (n = 28) once daily beginning 30 min before surgery. Results: Adverse events: meloxicam IV, 85%; placebo, 93%. Adverse events commonly associated with opioids: 41 versus 61% - including nausea (33 vs 50%), vomiting (19 vs 18%) and ileus (4 vs 18%). Wound healing satisfaction scores (physician-rated), clinical laboratory findings and vital signs were similar in both groups. No anastomotic leaks were reported. Opioid consumption, postoperative pain intensity, length of stay and times to first bowel sound, first flatus and first bowel movement were significantly lower with meloxicam IV versus placebo. Most subjects (>92%) were satisfied with postoperative pain medication. Conclusion: Meloxicam IV was generally well tolerated and associated with decreased opioid consumption, lower resource utilization and functional benefits. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03323385 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Meloxicam Intravenous Injection

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are available online to subscribers. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, contact Wolters Kluwer customer service at 866-397-3433.

Preoperative meloxicam versus postoperative meloxicam for pain control, patients' satisfaction and function recovery in hip osteoarthritis patients who receive total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled study

This study aimed to compare the analgesic effect, patients’ satisfaction, tolerance and hip-joint function recovery by preoperative meloxicam versus postoperative meloxicam in treating hip osteoarthritis (OA) patients receiving total hip arthroplasty (THA). 132 hip OA patients who underwent THA surgery were allocated into postoperative analgesia (POST) and preoperative analgesia (PRE) groups at a 1:1 ratio. In the PRE group, patients took meloxicam 15 mg at 24 h pre-operation, 7.5 mg at 4 h, 24 h, 48 h and 72 h post-operation; in the POST group, patients received meloxicam 15 mg at 4 h post-operation, then 7.5 mg at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h post-operation. Furthermore, postoperative pain, consumption of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), overall satisfaction and adverse events were evaluated within 96 h post-operation; meanwhile, Harris hip score was assessed within 6 months post-operation. Pain VAS at rest at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and pain VAS at passive movement at 6 h, 12 h were decreased in PRE group compared to POST group. In addition, additional consumption of PCA and the total consumption of PCA were both reduced in PRE group compared to POST group. Additionally, overall satisfaction in PRE group was higher at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h compared to POST group. While Harris hip score was of no difference between POST group and PRE group at M3 or M6. Besides, no difference in adverse events incidence was found between the two groups. In conclusion, preoperative meloxicam achieves better efficacy and similar tolerance compared to postoperative meloxicam in hip OA patients post THA.

Platelet Function: Meloxicam Intravenous in Whole Blood Samples From Healthy Volunteers

Nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective treatments for pain but may induce bleeding events due to platelet dysfunction associated with inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)‐1 impairing thromboxane production. An intravenous nanocrystal formulation of meloxicam, a COX‐2 preferential nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug, is under development for the treatment of moderate to severe pain. This single‐center ex vivo study evaluated the effect of meloxicam intravenous and ketorolac on platelet function in whole blood samples from healthy volunteers. Each whole blood sample was aliquoted to allow analysis using a platelet function analyzer under negative control (untreated), positive control (2 therapeutic ketorolac concentrations), and meloxicam intravenous (1 therapeutic, 3 supratherapeutic concentrations) using both collagen with epinephrine and collagen with adenosine diphosphate reagent cartridges. The platelet function analyzer determines closure time by simulating platelet adhesion and aggregation following vascular injury. The final analysis set included data from 8 subjects. The collagen with adenosine diphosphate analysis (sensitive to thrombocytopathies) showed no significant differences in closure time for meloxicam‐ or ketorolac‐treated samples and untreated control. The collagen with epinephrine analysis (sensitive to aspirin‐induced platelet abnormalities) produced no significant difference in closure time between any meloxicam concentration and untreated control. Ketorolac was associated with significantly longer closure times vs untreated control at both the 2.5‐ and 5‐µg/mL concentrations (P = .003 and .0257, respectively) and vs meloxicam at several concentrations. Similar results were observed when all analyzed samples were included. Meloxicam intravenous had no significant effect on closure times at therapeutic or supratherapeutic concentrations in this ex vivo study.

Safety, Tolerability, and Effect on Opioid Use of Meloxicam IV Following Orthopedic Surgery

Objective

A Phase 3 randomized multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT02720692) compared once-daily intravenous (IV) meloxicam 30 mg to placebo, when added to the standard of care pain management regimens, in adults with moderate-to-severe pain following major elective surgery and concluded that meloxicam IV had a safety profile similar to placebo and reduced opioid consumption.

Methods

In this post hoc subgroup analysis of orthopedic surgery subjects, 379 subjects received meloxicam IV 30 mg or IV-administered placebo every 24 hrs for ≤7 doses. Safety was assessed via AEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, and ECG, with an emphasis on specific AEs, including injection site reactions, bleeding, cardiovascular, hepatic, renal, thrombotic, and wound healing events. Daily opioid consumption was assessed during treatment.

Results

Among meloxicam IV-treated subjects, 64.7% experienced ≥1 AE versus 68.8% of placebo-treated subjects. Investigators assessed most AEs to be mild or moderate in intensity and unrelated to treatment. Total opioid consumption (36.8 mg versus 50.3 mg IV morphine equivalent dose; P=0.0081) and opioid consumption during time points 0‒24, 24‒48, 0‒48, and 0‒72 hrs were statistically significantly lower in the meloxicam IV group.

Conclusion

Meloxicam IV demonstrated no significant differences in the number and frequency of AEs versus placebo in subjects following orthopedic surgery. Opioid consumption was reduced in the meloxicam IV group versus placebo.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02720692).

Comparison of analgesic effect, knee joint function recovery, and safety profiles between pre-operative and post-operative administrations of meloxicam in knee osteoarthritis patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pre-operative and post-operative meloxicam administration regarding post-operative pain control and knee joint function recovery in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Totally, 196 KOA patients who underwent TKA were consecutively enrolled and randomly assigned into pre-operative (N = 98) and post-operative administration group (N = 98) as 1:1 ratio. Pre-operative administration group received meloxicam 15 mg at 24 h pre-operation and 7.5 mg at 4 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h post-operation, respectively. Post-operative administration group received meloxicam 15 mg at 4 h post-operation and 7.5 mg at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h post-operation, respectively. Pain visual analog scale (VAS) at rest and at flexion, patient's global assessment (PGA), patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) consumption, hospital for special surgery (HSS), knee score, and adverse events were assessed.

RESULTS

Pre-operative meloxicam administration attenuated pain VAS score at rest at 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h; and pain VAS score at flexion at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h; as well as PGA score at 6 h, 12 h, 48 h post-TKA compared with post-operative meloxicam administration. Additional and total consumption of PCA were both decreased in pre-operative meloxicam administration group than post-operative meloxicam administration group, while HSS knee score at 3 months post-TKA was similar between pre-operative and post-operative meloxicam administration groups. Regarding safety, the incidence of adverse events was of no difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Pre-operative administration of meloxicam might assist the post-operative pain management and care in KOA patients who underwent TKA.