Maddalena Opioid Switching Score in patients with cancer pain

Effect of gene variants on opioid dose, pain and adverse effect outcomes in advanced cancer: an explorative study

Aim: Associations between gene variants and opioid net effect are unclear. We conducted an exploratory pharmacogenetic analysis of 35 gene variants and opioid response in advanced cancer. Patients & methods: This multi-center prospective cohort study included clinical data, questionnaires (pain and adverse effects) and DNA (blood). Negative binomial regression and logistic regression were used. Results: Within 54 participants, eight statistically significant associations (p = 0.002-0.038) were observed between gene variants and opioid dose, pain scores or adverse effects, the majority being within the neuroimmune TLR4 pathway (IL1B [rs1143634], IL2 [rs2069762], IL6 [rs1800795], BDNF [rs6265]) and ARRB2 pathway (ARRB2 [rs3786047], DRD2 [rs6275]). Conclusion: Neuroimmune pathway genes may contribute to differences in opioid response in cancer and may be included in future similar studies.

Switching to Intravenous Methadone in Advanced Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

CONTEXT

Information about opioid switching to intravenous methadone is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of opioid switching to intravenous methadone (IV-ME) in patients admitted to an acute supportive/palliative care unit (ASPCU). The secondary outcome was to assess the conversion ratio from IV-ME to oral methadone at time of hospital discharge.

METHODS

We retrieved from the pharmacy registry the list of patients who were prescribed IV-ME during their ASPCU admission for a period of 47 months. Poor analgesia with previous opioids and/or adverse effects were the main indications for opioid switching. IV-ME was titrated until acceptable analgesia was achieved. The effective dose was multiplied by three to establish the intravenous daily dose, given as a continuous infusion. Doses were then changed according to the clinical needs. Once the patient was stabilized, IV-ME dose was converted to oral methadone, by using an initial ratio of 1:1.2. Further dose changes were made according to clinical needs until stabilization, before patients' discharge. Information about patients' characteristics, pain scores on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) questionnaire, previous opioids and their doses, expressed as oral morphine equivalents (OME), were recorded. The effective bolus of IV-ME, initial daily infusion rate, and oral methadone doses were assessed, and conversion ratios calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were taken into consideration for the study. The mean effective bolus of IV-ME titrated for achieving acceptable analgesia was 9 mg (range 5-15 mg). The mean daily continuous infusion rate of IV-ME was 27.6 mg/day (SD 21). The mean daily dose of oral methadone at time of discharge was 46.8 mg/day (SD 43). Discharge occurred within a median of seven days (range 6-9) after admission. Previous opioid (OME)/IV-ME, oral-IV-ME, and previous opioid (OME)/oral methadone were 6.25, 1.7, and 3.7, respectively.

CONCLUSION

IV-ME dose titration followed by intravenous infusion allowed a rapid pain control in few minutes in patients with severe pain intensity, not responsive to previous opioids. Conversion to oral route was successful and facilitated home discharge. Further studies should be performed to confirm these preliminary results.

Effectiveness of Opioid Switching in Advanced Cancer Pain: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Opioid switching is a common practice of substituting one opioid for another to improve analgesia or adverse effects; however, it has limited evidence. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of opioid switching in advanced cancer. This multi-center prospective cohort study recruited patients assessed to switch opioids (opioid switch group) or to continue ongoing opioid treatment (control group). Clinical data (demographics, opioids) and validated instruments (pain and adverse effects) were collected over two timepoints seven days apart. Descriptive analyses were utilized. Non-parametric tests were used to determine differences. Fifty-four participants were recruited (23 control group, 31 switch group). At the follow-up, opioid switching reduced pain (worst, average, and now) (p < 0.05), uncontrolled breakthrough pain (3-fold reduction, p = 0.008), and psychological distress (48% to 16%, p < 0.005). The switch group had a ≥25% reduction in the reported frequency of seven moderate-to-severe adverse effects (score ≥ 4), compared to a reduction in only one adverse effect in the control group. The control group experienced no significant pain differences at the follow-up. Opioid switching is effective at reducing pain, adverse effects, and psychological distress in a population with advanced cancer pain, to levels of satisfactory symptom control in most patients within 1 week.

Conversion ratios for opioid switching: a pragmatic study

BACKGROUND

The final conversion ratios among opioids used for successful switching are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the initial and final conversion ratios used for a successful opioid switching in cancer patients, and eventual associated factors.

METHODS

Ninety-five patients who were successfully switched were evaluated. The following data were collected: age, gender, Karnofsky performance score, primary cancer, cognitive function, the presence of neuropathic, and incident pain. Opioids, route of administration, and their doses expressed in oral morphine equivalents used before OS were recorded as well as opioids use for starting opioid switching, and at time of stabilization. Physical and psychological symptoms were routinely evaluated by Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale.

RESULTS

No statistical changes were observed between the initial conversion ratios and those achieved at time of stabilization for all the sequences of opioid switching. When considering patients switched to methadone, there was no association between factors taken into considerations.

CONCLUSION

Opioid switching is a highly effective and safe technique, improving analgesia and reducing the opioid-related symptom burden. The final conversion ratios were not different from those used for starting opioid switching. Patients receiving higher doses of opioids should be carefully monitored for individual and unexpected responses in an experienced palliative care unit, particularly those switched to methadone. Future studies should provide data regarding the profile of patients with difficult pain to be hospitalized.