Methadone versus Fentanyl in Patients with Radiation-Induced Nociceptive Pain with Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review

Pain is one of the most burdensome symptoms in people with cancer, and opioid analgesics are considered the mainstay of cancer pain management. For this review, the authors evaluated the efficacy and toxicities of opioid analgesics compared with placebo, other opioids, nonopioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic treatments for background cancer pain (continuous and relatively constant pain present at rest), and breakthrough cancer pain (transient exacerbation of pain despite stable and adequately controlled background pain). They found a paucity of placebo-controlled trials for background cancer pain, although tapentadol or codeine may be more efficacious than placebo (moderate-certainty to low-certainty evidence). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including aspirin, piroxicam, diclofenac, ketorolac, and the antidepressant medicine imipramine, may be at least as efficacious as opioids for moderate-to-severe background cancer pain. For breakthrough cancer pain, oral transmucosal, buccal, sublingual, or intranasal fentanyl preparations were identified as more efficacious than placebo but were more commonly associated with toxicities, including constipation and nausea. Despite being recommended worldwide for the treatment of cancer pain, morphine was generally not superior to other opioids, nor did it have a more favorable toxicity profile. The interpretation of study results, however, was complicated by the heterogeneity in the study populations evaluated. Given the limited quality and quantity of research, there is a need to reappraise the clinical utility of opioids in people with cancer pain, particularly those who are not at the end of life, and to further explore the effects of opioids on immune system function and quality of life in these individuals.

The Use of Opioids in the Management of Chronic Pain: Synopsis of the 2022 Updated U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline

DESCRIPTION

In May 2022, leadership within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the use of opioids when managing chronic pain. This synopsis summarizes the recommendations that the authors believe are the most important to highlight.

METHODS

In December 2020, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group assembled a team to update the 2017 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The guideline development team included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the National Academy of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline team developed key questions to guide a systematic evidence review that was done by an independent third party and distilled 20 recommendations for care using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. The guideline team also created 3 one-page algorithms to help guide clinical decision making. This synopsis presents the recommendations and highlights selected recommendations on the basis of clinical relevance.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This guideline is intended for clinicians who may be considering opioid therapy to manage patients with chronic pain. This synopsis reviews updated recommendations for the initiation and continuation of opioid therapy; dose, duration, and taper of opioids; screening, assessment, and evaluation; and risk mitigation. New additions are highlighted, including recommendations about the use of buprenorphine instead of full agonist opioids; assessing for behavioral health conditions and factors associated with higher risk for harm, such as pain catastrophizing; and the use of pain and opioid education to reduce the risk for prolonged opioid use for postsurgical pain.

Investigating the Physiological Mechanisms between Resistance Training and Pain Relief in the Cancer Population: A Literature Review

This literature review examines the mechanisms of how exercise, specifically in the form of resistance training, may lead to pain relief in the cancer population. Primary data from three different cancer populations: breast, prostate, and lung, will be examined. A number of experimental studies have been conducted to confirm the effectiveness of resistance training on pain relief as well as the biochemical pathways that relate to this process. In this review, we will examine 5 randomized controlled trials. For the purposes of this review, pain is defined as physical suffering or discomfort associated with illness. Pain is the body's natural signal, bringing attention to damage that has been sustained by tissues. However, chronic pain is common in the cancer population, and often serves no good purpose but instead will negatively impact both physical and mental health. The three types of pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, and inflammatory pathways have been investigated, and the knowledge of pain mechanisms allows for the understanding of how it is associated with pain. The purpose of this exploratory literature review is to give insight on how to maximize pain-relieving effects of resistance training. Research has indicated that resistance training modulates pain pathways by upregulating the release of pain-relieving substances including beta-endorphins, anti-inflammatory cytokines, and endocannabinoids. Understanding of the benefits of resistance training may be useful in relieving cancer pain, and reproducing effects of pain-relieving strategies while minimizing the symptoms related to cancer and its treatment.

Use of Opioids for Adults With Pain From Cancer or Cancer Treatment: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance on the use of opioids to manage pain from cancer or cancer treatment in adults.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in people with cancer, approaches to opioid initiation and titration, and the prevention and management of opioid adverse events. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2010, to February 17, 2022. American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 31 systematic reviews and 16 randomized controlled trials. Opioids have primarily been evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, and they effectively reduce pain in this population, with well-characterized adverse effects. Evidence was limited for several of the questions of interest, and the Expert Panel relied on consensus for these recommendations or noted that no recommendation could be made at this time.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Opioids should be initiated PRN (as needed) at the lowest possible dose to achieve acceptable analgesia and patient goals, with early assessment and frequent titration. For patients with a substance use disorder, clinicians should collaborate with a palliative care, pain, and/or substance use disorder specialist to determine the optimal approach to pain management. Opioid adverse effects should be monitored, and strategies are provided for prevention and management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Rediscovery of Methadone to Improve Outcomes in Pain Management

Clinically, methadone is most known for its use in the treatment of opioid maintenance therapy. However, methadone's pharmacological profile makes it an excellent analgesic that can enhance acute and chronic pain management. It is a potent μ-receptor agonist with a longer elimination half-life than most clinically used opioids. In addition, methadone inhibits serotonin and norepinephrine uptake, and it is an N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist. These distinct analgesic pathways mediate hyperalgesic, allodynic, and neuropathic pain. Its unique analgesic properties provide several essential benefits in perioperative use, neuropathic pain, cancer, and noncancer pain. Despite these proven clinical utilities, methadone has not been used widely to treat acute and chronic pain in opioid naïve patients. This article describes the unique pharmacology of methadone and provides emerging evidence to support its application in acute and chronic pain management. Pain management options and guidelines for surgical patients on methadone are discussed as well.

Revision of Pharmacological Treatment Recommendations for Cancer Pain: Clinical Guidelines from the Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine

Background: Pain is one of the most common symptoms in cancer patients. The Japanese Society for Palliative Medicine (JSPM) first published its clinical guidelines for the management of cancer pain in 2010. Since then, more research on cancer pain management has been reported, and new drugs have become available in Japan. Thus, the JSPM has now revised the clinical guidelines using a validated methodology. Methods: This guideline was developed through a systematic review, discussion, and the Delphi method, following a formal guideline development process. Results: Thirty-five recommendations were created: 19 for the pharmacological management of cancer pain, 6 for the management of opioid-induced adverse effects, and 10 for pharmacological treatment procedures. Due to the lack of evidence that directly addressed our clinical questions, most of the recommendations had to be based on consensus among committee members and other guidelines. Discussion: It is critical to continue to build high-quality evidence in cancer pain management, and revise these guidelines accordingly.

Assistance of a Palliative Care Certified Nurse in the Alleviation of Refractory Cancer Pain by Switching Opioids to Oral Methadone in a Japanese Outpatient Setting

Although methadone has the potential to improve the management of cancer pain, it has some serious problems, such as respiratory depression and QT interval prolongation. Therefore, patients who are prescribed methadone must be educated, monitored, and supported by specialized medical staff, especially in the outpatient setting. We assessed the effectiveness of support from the palliative care certified nurse who used the checklists in opioid switching to oral methadone for patients with refractory pain. Through the multidisciplinary palliative care team at our hospital, 15 outpatients with cancer pain were prescribed oral methadone between April 2013 and December 2020, and 14 cases were successful in switching to methadone. After taking medication, the certified nurse called the patient's home daily for 3 to 5 days and confirmed that the patient had taken the methadone, the degree of pain, the number of rescue medications, and the appearance of side effects, such as respiratory depression. Careful management by a multidisciplinary team is essential for opioid switching to oral methadone administration for outpatients. Certified nurses may play an important role in maintaining safety and resolving the patients' and families' anxieties with respect to the prescription of methadone.

Narrative review of the management of oral mucositis during chemoradiation for head and neck cancer

Oral mucositis (OM) can be a significant problem for patients undergoing radiation or chemoradiation for head and neck cancer. In modern clinical trials, grade 3-4 OM can be seen in over 40% of patients and can cause a significant impact on their quality of life (QOL). Despite this fact, strategies for the prevention and treatment of OM vary widely, with options including both lifestyle modifications and pharmaceuticals. Here we evaluate and summarize the current clinical interventions for the management of radiation-induced OM. The majority of the current evidence focuses on reducing OM related pain. These agents are detailed over multiple clinical trials including treatment modalities such as: GC4419, doxepin mouthwash, diphenhydramine-lidocaine-antacid (DLA) mouthwash, gabapentin, and methadone. While several strategies have been employed to prevent radiation-induced OM, there is currently no strong evidence for the routine use of these agents in the clinic. After summarization of these treatments, we offer practical guidance for the treatment of OM in the clinic. We recommend a multiagent approach of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments including oral rinses, home humidification, escalating doses of gabapentin, doxepin or DLA mouthwash, over the counter analgesics, and lastly methadone. These interventions are tailored to address the expected increase of severity of symptoms during the course of head and neck radiotherapy.

Methadone for Pain Management: A Pharmacotherapeutic Review

Methadone is increasingly being used for its analgesic properties. Despite the increasing popularity, many healthcare providers are not familiar with methadone's complex pharmacology and best practices surrounding its use. The purpose of this narrative review article is to discuss the pharmacology of methadone, the evidence surrounding methadone's use in acute pain management and both chronic cancer and non-cancer pain settings, as well as highlight pertinent safety, monitoring, and opioid rotation considerations. Methadone has a unique mechanism of action when compared with all other opioids and for this reason methadone has come to hold a niche role in the management of opioid-induced hyperalgesia and central sensitization. Understanding of the mechanisms of variability in methadone disposition and drug interactions has evolved over the years, with the latest evidence revealing that CYP 2B6 is the major determinant of methadone elimination and plays a key role in methadone-related drug interactions. From an acute pain perspective, most studies evaluating the use of intraoperative intravenous methadone have reported lower pain scores and post-operative opioid requirements. Oral methadone is predominantly used as a second-line opioid treatment for select chronic pain conditions. As a result, several oral morphine to oral methadone conversion ratios have been proposed, as have methods in which to rotate to methadone. From an efficacy standpoint, limited literature exists regarding the effectiveness of methadone in the chronic pain setting with most of the available efficacy data pertaining to methadone's use in the treatment of cancer pain. Many of the prospective studies that exist feature low participant numbers. Few clinical trials investigating the role of methadone as an analgesic treatment are currently underway. The complicated pharmacokinetic properties of methadone and risks of harm associated with this drug highlight how critically important it is that healthcare providers understand these features before prescribing/dispensing methadone. Particular caution is required when converting patients from other opioids to methadone and for this reason only experienced healthcare providers should undertake such a task. Further randomized trials with larger sample sizes are needed to better define the effective and safe use of methadone for pain management.

A single-institution, randomized, pilot study evaluating the efficacy of gabapentin and methadone for patients undergoing chemoradiation for head and neck squamous cell cancer

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy between 2 analgesic regimens for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) undergoing definitive chemoradiation (CRT).

METHODS

The current study was a prospective, single-institution, 2-arm, randomized pilot study. Patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer seventh edition stage II to stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who were undergoing CRT were randomized to either arm 1, which entailed high-dose gabapentin (2700 mg daily) with the institutional standard of care (hydrocodone and/or acetaminophen progressing to fentanyl as needed), or arm 2, which comprised low-dose gabapentin (900 mg daily) with methadone. The primary endpoints were safety and toxicity. Secondary endpoints were pain, opioid requirement, and quality of life (QOL). Differences between the treatment arms at multiple time points were compared using a generalized linear mixed regression model with Sidak correction.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients (31 in arm 1 and 29 in arm 2) were enrolled from April 2015 to August 2017. There was no difference between the treatment arms with regard to adverse events or serious adverse events. Pain was not found to be different between the treatment arms. More patients in arm 1 did not require an opioid during treatment (42% vs 7%; P = .002). Patients in arm 2 experienced significantly better QOL outcomes across multiple domains, including overall health (P = .05), physical functioning (P = .04), role functioning (P = .01), and social functioning (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose prophylactic gabapentin increased the percentage of patients who required no opioid during treatment. Methadone may improve QOL compared with a regimen of short-acting opioids and fentanyl. However, pain was found to significantly worsen throughout treatment regardless of treatment arm, necessitating further studies to identify a more optimal regimen.

The Association between Patient Characteristics and Opioid Treatment Response in Neuropathic and Nociceptive Pain due to Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer pain remains a difficult problem, for which opioids are often necessary. At present it is difficult to predict the effectiveness of opioid therapy.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to assess the association between patient characteristics and opioid treatment response in cancer patients, and develop a model to predict probability of response.

SUBJECTS

We used data from two previously published randomized clinical trials, in which patients with head and neck cancer were treated with fentanyl or methadone (total N = 134).

MEASUREMENTS

Treatment success was defined as ≥50% pain reduction at one and five weeks. We analyzed patient characteristics (age, sex, depression, and anxiety), treatment characteristics (having had chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, methadone, or fentanyl) and pain characteristics (neuropathic and nociceptive).

DESIGN

Based on univariable and multivariable regression analyses determinants of therapy success were assessed. Based on these analyses a prediction model was developed.

RESULTS

Our analyses show that one-week therapy success was associated with methadone (odds ratio [OR] = 5.21), duration of pain in months (OR = 1.12), neuropathic pain (OR = 3.36), and age of the patient in years (OR = 0.95). Inclusion of these four characteristics into our prediction model resulted in an area under the curve of 81.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful analyses of patient attributes, treatment, and pain type of patients with head and neck cancer resulted in a prediction model that allowed to predict short-term pain relief and the opioid treatment response in neuropathic and nociceptive pain owing to cancer.