Opioid-induced or pain relief-reduced symptoms in advanced cancer patients?

Opioid dose titration for cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Opioid dose titration is a fundamental process of opioid therapy in cancer pain.

AIMS

To assess data opioid dose titration.

METHODS

The principal opioid dose titration methods, outcomes, and modalities of administration regarding the different opioid preparations were examined in different clinical contexts.

RESULTS

Most studies suggested that opioid-naive patients should be started at doses of 15-30 mg/day of oral morphine equivalents. Opioid-tolerant patients may receive low or higher doses of oral morphine equivalents, depending on the level of opioid tolerance. Generally, dose increments of 30%-50% seem to be indicated to start dose titration. Some patients with severe excruciating cancer pain may present as an emergency requiring a rapid application of powerful analgesic strategies. The intravenous use of opioids may circumvent this problem providing a faster pain relief, due to the large availability and rapid achievement of effective plasma concentrations.

DISCUSSION

Opioid dose titration is a delicate passage in patients with cancer pain. This approach may be different according to different clinical conditions. Opioid dose titration requires expertise to optimize cancer pain management while minimizing the development of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

While most approaches are meaningful and partially supported by existing literature, more studies are necessary to establish advantages and disadvantages in different clinical conditions. Optimization of opioid dose titration is of paramount importance.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review provides the most recent insights on the different modalities of opioid dose titration in cancer pain management.

Rapid Titration With Intravenous Oxycodone for Severe Cancer Pain and Oral Conversion Ratio

CONTEXT

to assess a dose titration with intravenous oxycodone to achieve rapid pain relief of cancer pain of severe intensity. The second objective was to provide a conversion ratio with the oral route.

METHODS

Cancer patients admitted for severe pain were prospectively assessed. At admission (T0) previous opioid doses were recorded. Edmonton symptom assessment scale (ESAS) was collected from T0 until the conclusion of the observation. Intravenous boluses of oxycodone were given until the initial signs of significant analgesia were detected. The effective dose was multiplied for six and given as intravenous continuous infusion. When the patient was considered stabilized the intravenous daily dose was converted to oral oxycodone using an initial ratio of 1:2. Subsequently, doses of oral oxycodone were changed according to the clinical situation.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were examined. A mean effective bolus dose of oxycodone was 9.5 mg (SD 8.0) allowed to achieve a meaningful pain relief in a mean of 10.4 minutes (SD 3.3). The mean initial and the final infusion doses were 51.0 mg/day (standard deviation 40.9) and 69.7 mg/day ( standard deviation76.6), respectively. A significant change in pain intensity was observed at the different time intervals (P<0.0005). Conversion to oral route occurred after a mean of 2.7 days (standard deviation1.2) of intravenous oxycodone. The final mean conversion ratio was 1:2,12 ( standard deviation0.36).

CONCLUSION

Rapid intravenous oxycodone dose titration resulted in rapid pain relief. The intravenous-oral conversion ratio of 1:2 is reliable. Further studies are necessary to confirm this preliminary observation.

The occurrence and risk factors of constipation in inpatient palliative care unit patients vs. nursing home residents

Introduction

Constipation is one of the most frequent clinical and nursing problems both in palliative care patients and in nursing home residents.

Aim

To assess the occurrence of constipation and its risk factors in adult inpatient palliative care units versus nursing homes.

Material and methods

An epidemiological study was performed in an inpatient hospice and a nursing home.

Results

Fifty-one hospice patients and 49 nursing home residents were included in the study. Cancer was the main clinical condition in 90% of the palliative care patients (PCPs), and dementia or other psychotic disorders were predominant in the nursing home residents (NHRs). More PCPs had constipation than did NHRs (80% vs. 59%; p = 0.02), although none of the single constipation symptoms differed statistically between these two groups. The insufficient food intake was twice as severe in the hospice patients (p = 0.0001). 68.6% of PCPs took strong opioids, while none of the NHRs did. Three times more NHRs spent at least 50% of daytime in bed than did PCPs (73.5% vs. 23.5%; p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Constipation is very frequent in both palliative care patients and nursing home residents, but PCPs are more prone to it. The NHR and PCR groups should not be treated uniformly as the end-of-life population, referring to prevention and treatment of constipation, therapy needs, and the means enrolled for optimal symptom control.

Family caregivers of Palliative Cancer Patients at Home: The puzzle of Pain Management

The purpose of this grounded theory study was to understand the processes used by family care-givers to manage the pain of cancer patients at home. A total of 24 family caregivers participated. They were recruited using purposeful then theoretical sampling. The data sources were taped, transcribed (semi-structured) interviews and field notes. Data analysis was based on Strauss and Corbin's (1998) requirements for open, axial, and selective coding. The result was an explanatory model titled “the puzzle of pain management,” which includes four main processes: “drawing on past experiences”; “strategizing a game plan”; “striving to respond to pain”; and “gauging the best fit,” a decision-making process that joins the puzzle pieces. Understanding how family caregivers assemble their puzzle pieces can help health care professionals make decisions related to the care plans they create for pain control and help them to recognize the importance of providing information as part of resolving the puzzle of pain management.

Behavioral risk factors of constipation in palliative care patients

BACKGROUND

Constipation is frequently encountered in palliative care patients and remains a significant therapeutic problem. The etiology of constipation is multifactorial. Nutritional and behavioral factors are considered common causes of constipation; however, their impact has not yet been assessed precisely.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between the frequency of bowel movements (FoBM) and risk factors of constipation in palliative care patients.

DESIGN AND SUBJECTS

A cohort retrospective study was performed in three palliative care centers, including outpatient, home, and inpatient care cancer patients using questionnaires on bowel dysfunction symptoms, behavioral risk factors, and opioid use. The inclusion criterion was adult patients examined on the day of admission. The exclusion criterion was Karnofsky performance status score ≤20.

MEASUREMENTS

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to measure the statistical dependence between two variables and frequency analysis was performed using the chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-seven valid questionnaires were collected. We found the correlation between FoBM and insufficient food and fluid intake (p < 0.0001), as well as for inadequate conditions of privacy (p = 0.0008), dependency on a caregiver (p = 0.0059), and the patient's overall performance status (p = 0.013). We did not manage to prove bed rest as the independent risk factor of constipation.

CONCLUSIONS

The main risk factors of constipation in palliative care patients appeared to be insufficient fluid and food intake, inadequate conditions of privacy, dependency on a caregiver, as well as poor general performance status.

Do pilocarpine drops help dry mouth in palliative care patients: a protocol for an aggregated series of n-of-1 trials

Background

It is estimated that 39,000 Australians die from malignant disease yearly. Of these, 60% to 88% of advanced cancer patients suffer xerostomia, the subjective feeling of mouth dryness. Xerostomia has significant physical, social and psychological consequences which compromise function and quality of life. Pilocarpine is one treatment for xerostomia. Most studies have shown some variation in individual response to pilocarpine, in terms of dose used, and timing and extent of response.

We will determine a population estimate of the efficacy of pilocarpine drops (6 mg) three times daily compared to placebo in relieving dry mouth in palliative care (PC) patients. A secondary aim is to assess individual patients’ response to pilocarpine and provide reports detailing individual response to patients and their treating clinician.

Methods/Design

Aggregated n-of-1 trials (3 cycle, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover trials using standardized measures of effect). Individual trials will identify which patients respond to the medication. To produce a population estimate of a treatment effect, the results of all cycles will be aggregated.

Discussion

Managing dry mouth with treatment supported by the best possible evidence will improve functional status of patients, and improve quality of life for patients and carers. Using n-of-1 trials will accelerate the rate of accumulation of high-grade evidence to support clinical therapies used in PC.

Trial registration

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Number: 12610000840088.

Nutrition impact symptoms in advanced cancer patients: frequency and specific interventions, a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Involuntary weight loss (IWL) is frequent in advanced cancer patients causing compromised anticancer treatment outcomes and function. Cancer cachexia is influenced by nutrition impact symptoms (NIS). The aim of this study was to explore the frequency of NIS in advanced patients and to assess specific interventions guided by a 12-item NIS checklist.

METHODS

Consecutive patients from an outpatient nutrition-fatigue clinic completed the NIS checklist. The NIS checklist was developed based on literature review and multiprofessional clinical expert consensus. Chart review was performed to detect defined NIS typical interventions. Oncology outpatients not seen in the nutrition-fatigue clinic were matched for age, sex, and tumor to serve as controls.

RESULTS

In 52 nutrition-fatigue clinic patients, a mixed cancer population [IWL in 2 months 5.96 % (mean)], the five most frequent NIS were taste and smell alterations 27 %, constipation 19 %, abdominal pain 14 %, dysphagia 12 %, and epigastric pain 10 %. A statistically significant difference for NIS typical interventions in patients with taste and smell alterations (p = 0.04), constipation (p = 0.01), pain (p = 0.0001), and fatigue (p = 0.0004) were found compared to the control population [mixed cancer, 3.53 % IWL in 2 months (mean)].

CONCLUSION

NIS are common in advanced cancer patients. The NIS checklist can guide therapeutic nutrition-targeted interventions. The awareness for NIS will likely evoke more research in assessment, impact, and treatment.

Researching “Good Death” in a Hong Kong Palliative Care Program: A Clinical Data-Mining Study

This study operationalizes and assesses the percentage of “good deaths” achieved among Chinese cancer patients in a palliative care program, the profile of these patients, the relationship between patients with a good death and psychosocial factors, and the differences in background factors, and physical and psychosocial conditions between patients who experienced a good death and those who did not. Clinical data mining was the research method used. Records of deceased cancer patients between 2003 and 2005 in a palliative care unit were the sole data source. Good death was operationally defined as the patient's record indicating no pain (physical) or anxiety (psychological), and having open and honest communication with family (social) in the final assessment by the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS) just before death. Using these criteria, about one-fifth of patients (21.5%; 137 out of 638) experienced a good death. Those with a good death were significantly older and were in palliative care longer. Their records also indicated lower levels of constipation, insomnia, oral discomfort, and family anxiety at their first and at their final STAS assessments. Good death was positively associated with recorded indicators of fullness in life, caregivers' acceptance and support, and negatively with reported feelings of upset about changes in the course of their illness. The results heighten awareness among social workers and other healthcare professionals about the value of good death in patients in palliative care. This empirically-based awareness can foster professionals' ability to set intervention objectives to help patients in palliative care achieve this universally accepted goal.

Management of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients: systematic review and evidence-based recommendations

The objectives were to review the existing literature on management of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients and summarize the findings into evidence-based recommendations. Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were performed, using free text and MeSH/EMTREE search terms. The searches were limited to articles published in English from each database set-up date to 31 July 2009. Reference lists and relevant international conference proceedings were hand-searched. Fifty-five studies were identified, providing data on 5741 patients. The studies were classified into: (A) studies in which treatment of nausea/vomiting was the primary outcome (a total of 18 studies, of which eight studies specifically addressed opioid-induced emesis); and (B) studies in which nausea/vomiting were secondary or tertiary outcomes (37 studies). The existing evidence had several limitations, there was a lack of consistency and the overall quality was grade D. By applying the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system, three weak recommendations were formulated. The current evidence is too limited to give evidence-based recommendations for the use of antiemetics for opioid-induced nausea or vomiting in cancer patients. The evidence suggests that nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving an opioid might be reduced by changing the opioid or opioid administration route. The evidence was also too limited to prioritize between symptomatic treatment and adjustment of the opioid treatment.

Striving to respond to palliative care patients' pain at home: a puzzle for family caregivers

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

to describe the types of pain patients in palliative care at home experience and how family caregivers assess them and intervene.

RESEARCH APPROACH

qualitative using grounded theory.

SETTING

family caregivers' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

24 family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care at home.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

semistructured interviews and field notes. Data analysis used Strauss and Corbin's recommendations for open, axial, and selective coding.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

pain, pain management, family caregivers, palliative care, and home care.

FINDINGS

caregivers assessed different types of pain and, therefore, were experimenting with different types of interventions. Not all family caregivers were able to distinguish between the different pains afflicting patients, and, consequently, were not selecting the most appropriate interventions. This often led to poorly managed pain and frustrated family caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

The accurate assessment of the types of pain the patient is experiencing, coupled with the most appropriate intervention for pain control, is critical for optimal pain relief as well as supporting the confidence and feelings of family caregivers who are undertaking the complex process of cancer pain management.

INTERPRETATION

nurses involved with patients receiving palliative care and their family caregivers should be aware of all types of pain experienced by the patient and how caregivers are managing the pain. Nurses should be knowledgeable about different pain relief interventions to help family caregivers obtain accurate information, understand their options, and administer these interventions safely and effectively.

Does pain intensity predict a poor opioid response in cancer patients?

AIM

The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that initial pain intensity is not a predictive factor of poor opioid response in advanced cancer patients, as suggested by a recent work.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of one-hundred-sixty-seven patients referred for treatment of cancer-related pain was conducted. Pain intensity at admission was recorded and patients were divided in three categories of pain intensity: mild, moderate and severe. Patients were offered a treatment with opioid dose titration, according to department policy. Data regarding opioid doses and pain intensity were collected after dose titration was completed. Four levels of opioid response were considered: (a) good pain control, with minimal opioid escalation and without relevant adverse effects; (b) good pain control requiring more aggressive opioid escalation, for example doubling the doses in four days; (c) adequate pain control associated with the occurrence of adverse effects; (d) poor pain control with adverse effects.

RESULTS

Seventy-six, forty-four, forty-one and six patients showed a response a, b, c, and d, respectively. No correlation between baseline pain intensity categories and opioid response was found. Patients with response 'b' and 'd' showed higher values of OEImg.

CONCLUSION

Baseline pain intensity does not predict the outcome after an appropriate opioid titration. It is likely that non-homogeneous pain treatment would have biased the outcome of a previous work.

Symptom clusters in patients with advanced cancers

GOALS OF WORK

It has been observed that certain cancer symptoms frequently occur together. Prior research on symptom patterns has focused mainly on inpatients, early stage cancers, or a single cancer type or metastatic site. Our aim was to explore symptom clusters among outpatients with different advanced cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Symptom scores by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) were routinely collected for patients attending the Oncology Palliative Care Clinics at Princess Margaret Hospital from January 2005 to October 2007. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed for the entire patient cohort and within specific disease sites to determine inter-relationships of the nine ESAS symptoms.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1,366 patients was included: 682 (50%) were male and 684 (50%) were female. The median age was 64 years (range 18 to 74 years). The most common primary cancer sites were gastrointestinal (27%), lung (14%), and breast (11%). The three most distressful symptoms were fatigue, poor general well-being, and decreased appetite. PCA of symptoms for the entire patient cohort revealed two major symptom clusters: cluster 1 included fatigue, drowsiness, nausea, decreased appetite, and dyspnea, which accounted for 45% of the total variance; cluster 2 included anxiety and depression, which accounted for 10% of the total variance. There was high internal reliability in the clusters (Cronbach's alpha coefficient approximately 0.80). PCA of symptoms within the various primary cancer sites revealed differences in the pattern of symptom clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced cancers, distinct symptom clusters can be identified, which are influenced by primary cancer site. Treatments directed at symptom clusters rather than individual symptoms may provide greater therapeutic benefit. Further prospective studies are warranted in order to develop more effective targeted palliative interventions for the advanced cancer patient population.

Variable response to opioid treatment: any genetic predictors within sight?

The aim of this literature review is to summarize and discuss the available evidence for a relationship between polymorphisms in human genes and variability in opioid analgesia and side effects among patients treated for moderate or severe pain. The evidence supporting a role of certain alleles, genotypes or haplotypes in modulation of opioid analgesia is derived from a limited number of studies, a limited number of genes and a limited number of opioids. Although several interesting candidates have emerged as potentially relevant factors, only for one polymorphism, the prevalent 118A>G of the micro-opioid receptor, the accumulated evidence is sufficient to suggest a clinically relevant effect for an opioid used for moderate or severe pain. Still the data are valid only at the group level and cannot be used to predict treatment outcome in individual patients. Only a few of the symptoms often seen as opioid adverse effects in palliative care, such as nausea, vomiting, constipation and sedation, have been associated with genetic variants in various genes, but the results have been based on case reports, healthy volunteers or post-operative patients. So far, there is no clear evidence that genetic markers can be used to predict opioid efficacy or adverse effects in palliative care patients. This reflects the general lack of studies performed in the context of palliative care, the lack of sufficiently scaled studies and the lack of international standards for the assessment of subjective symptoms.

Pain management of opioid-treated cancer patients in hospital settings in Denmark

AIM

To evaluate the performance and quality of cancer pain management in hospital settings.

METHODS

Anaesthesiologists specialised in pain and palliative medicine studied pain management in departments of oncology and surgery. Study days were randomly chosen and patients treated with oral opioids were included. Information regarding pain aetiology and mechanisms, pain medications and opioid side effects were registered from the medical records and by examining patients. Pain intensity was assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory.

RESULTS

In total, 59 cancer patients were included. In 49 (83%) patients pain aetiology was assessed by the physicians of the departments of oncology and surgery. In only 19 (32%) patients they assessed pain mechanisms. The median oral morphine dose was 120 mg/day (range: 10-720 mg/day). Seventy-eight per cent of patients received opioids at adequate regular intervals according to the duration of action. In 88% of the patients supplemental short-acting oral opioids were given on demand and the median supplemental oral dose was 16.5% of the daily dose. Seven patients with neuropathic pain received adjuvant drugs, whereas six patients with non-neuropathic pain received adjuvant drugs. Regarding opioid side effects only constipation and nausea were treated in the majority of the patients. Average pain intensity in the last 24 h for the total number of patients (n=59) < or =5 cm was 88.1% (confidence interval 77.1-95.1).

CONCLUSION

Cancer pain was prevalent in opioid-treated patients in hospital settings: however, focussing on average pain intensity, the outcome seems favourable compared with other countries. Pain mechanisms were seldom examined and adjuvant drugs were not specifically used for neuropathic pain. Opioid dosing intervals and supplemental opioid doses were most often adequate. However, opioid side effects were highly prevalent and most side effects were left untreated.

Opioid titration in cancer pain: a critical review

Initiation of therapy with strong opioids is a challenging phase to obtain the maximum benefit and to gain the patient's compliance. The approach could be different, depending on the clinical situation and type of opioid regimen. Substantially, the need to titrate the dose of strong opioids emerges in different conditions: (a) in opioid-naive patients who require an opioid treatment; (b) in patients no longer responsive to weaker drugs requiring strong opioids; (c) in patients already receiving strong opioids requiring higher doses because of an increase in pain intensity or a new acute pain problem; (d) in patients who are severely suffering and need an intensive as well as rapid intervention, due to previous persistent undertreatment. Whilst there is a vast literature confirming the effectiveness of most opioid drugs for the treatment of chronic pain, there is a lack of information regarding opioid titration. This review assesses the principal titration methods and outcomes regarding the different opioid drugs and their modalities of administration, in different clinical contexts.

Pharmacological Management of Cancer Pain in the Elderly

Existing studies indicate a high prevalence rate and poor management of cancer pain in the elderly. Pain is often considered an expected concomitant of aging, and older patients are considered more sensitive to opioids. Despite the well known pharmacokinetic changes in the elderly, the complex network of factors involved in the opioid response make the evaluation of a single element, such as age, more difficult. Notwithstanding such difficulties, appropriate analgesic treatment is able to control cancer pain in the elderly in most cases. Skills necessary to optimise pain control in older cancer patients include the ability to objectively assess functional age (not necessarily related to chronological age since the rate of decline is variable), understand the impact of coexisting conditions, carefully manage the numbers and types of drugs taken at the same time and adequately communicate with patients and relatives. The most common treatment of cancer pain consists of the use of regularly given oral analgesics. The elderly are at increased risk of developing toxicity from NSAIDs, and the overall safety of these drugs in frail elderly patients should be considered. When older patients have clear contraindications to NSAIDs, manifest signs of toxicity from these agents, or find that pain is no longer controlled with this class of drugs, opioids should be started. A variety of opioids are available, and they differ widely with respect to analgesic potency and adverse effects among the elderly. Although the aged population requires lower doses of opioids, only careful titration based on individual response can ensure the appropriate response to clinical demand. Elderly patients are potentially more likely to be affected by opioid toxicity because of the physiological changes associated with aging. Nevertheless, appropriate dosage and administration may limit these risks. Cancer patients with pain who do not respond to increasing doses of opioids because they develop adverse effects before achieving acceptable analgesia may be switched to alternative opioids. Despite the favourable effects reported with opioid switching, monitoring is crucial, particularly in the elderly or patients who are switched from high doses of opioids. Adjuvant analgesics, including antidepressants, antiepileptics, corticosteroids and bisphosphonates may help in the treatment of certain types of chronic pain. With an appropriate and careful approach, it should be possible to reduce or eliminate unrelieved cancer pain in most elderly patients and, consequently, to enhance their quality of life. Older patients with cancer should be continuously assessed for cancer pain, both before and after analgesic treatment.

Opioid escalation in patients with cancer pain: the effect of age

Elderly people are commonly considered more susceptible to opioid effects. However, no data regarding the need for opioid escalation in patients already receiving opioids for the management of chronic pain are available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences between younger and older patients during the crucial phase of opioid titration. One hundred consecutive patients with cancer pain requiring further opioid dose refinement were recruited for this cohort study. Pain intensity, dose of opioids, number of opioids used (need to switch), routes of administration used, and opioid-related symptoms were measured from admission until dose stabilization. Opioid escalation indexes (OEIs) were calculated. For the purpose of analysis, patients were divided into three age groups (<65, 65-74, 75 or over). Despite differences in opioid doses at admission (lower in older patients), no differences were found in routes, need to switch, OEI, or other parameters between younger and older patients. Similarly, adverse effects did not significantly differ between the three groups, although an overall distress score worsened in older patients during acute titration and then improved at stabilization time. These data contradict the assumption that older patients who already receive opioids are more susceptible than younger adults to opioid effects during opioid titration. Although the elderly require lower doses, opioid effects do not appear to vary with age in this population. However, the group of patients over 75 was relatively small and data should be interpreted with caution. Careful titration based on the individual response seems appropriate irrespective of age.

Patterns of Dosage changes with transdermal buprenorphine and transdermal fentanyl for the treatment of noncancer and cancer pain: A retrospective data analysis in Germany

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that buprenorphine may have a low association with tolerance development compared with other strong opioids. In a previous study by our group, mean cohort and intraindividual dosage increases over an entire course of treatment and on a per-day basis were significantly lower with transdermal (TD) buprenorphine than with TD fentanyl. However, no information concerning the relationship between qualitative and quantitative dose changes is available.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare TD buprenorphine and TD fentanyl with respect to dosage increases, dosage stability, and the nature of dosage changes.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis used data from the IMS Disease Analyzer-Mediplus database, which contains patient-related data documented by 400 medical practices in Germany. Data from patients with noncancer or cancer pain treated with TD buprenorphine or TD fentanyl for at least 3 months between May 2002 and April 2005 were analyzed. Daily dosages were directly determined from the prescribed patch strength, taking into account the possibility of multiple patches applied simultaneously. To determine dosage stability, patients were classified based on the type of dosage change (stable, increase, alternating, or decrease) of the prescribed dosages. From the prescribed daily dosages, mean percentage increases were calculated on a per-patient basis for the entire treatment period and per day, and these were assessed in relation to the type of dosage change.

RESULTS

In total, 631 patients with noncancer pain and 605 patients with cancer pain were included in the analysis (782 women, 454 men; mean age, 76.3 years [range, 29-100 years]). Treatment indications included osteoarthritis, low back pain, osteoporosis (noncancer groups), and neoplasm (cancer groups). Patients had similar analgesic premedication requirements based on steps 1 to 3 of the World Health Organization analgesic ladder. Comedication requirements for breakthrough pain were also similar between the TD buprenorphine and TD fentanyl groups. The mean percentage increases per day were 0.10% (TD buprenorphine) and 0.25% (TD fentanyl) in the noncancer groups and 0.19% (TD buprenorphine) and 0.47% (TD fentanyl) in the cancer groups (both, P < 0.05). A significantly larger proportion of patients receiving TD buprenorphine had stable dosages over the entire treatment period compared with patients receiving TD fentanyl (noncancer groups: 56.9% vs 41.6%; cancer groups: 50.0% vs 26.2% [both, P < 0.05]). Compared with TD buprenorphine, the proportion of patients with alternating dosage changes was significantly greater in patients receiving TD fentanyl (noncancer groups: 22.7% vs 13.1%; cancer groups: 30.6% vs 11.8% [both, P < 0.05]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective data analysis, compared with TD buprenorphine, the increase in mean daily dosage was significantly greater in patients treated with TD fentanyl. Also, compared with TD buprenorphine, alternating dosage changes were seen in a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving TD fentanyl. On the other hand, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with TD buprenorphine had stable dosages over their entire treatment periods.