1
|
Abdel Shaheed C, Hayes C, Maher CG, Ballantyne JC, Underwood M, McLachlan AJ, Martin JH, Narayan SW, Sidhom MA. Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74:286-313. [PMID: 38108561 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21823] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2023] [Revised: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Abdel Shaheed
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia
| | - Christopher Hayes
- College of Health, Medicine, and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jane C Ballantyne
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Martin Underwood
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
- University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew J McLachlan
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Pharmacy School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jennifer H Martin
- College of Health, Medicine, and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sujita W Narayan
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Pharmacy School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mark A Sidhom
- Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- South Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Reis PS, Kraychete DC, Pedreira EDM, Barreto ESR, Antunes Júnior CR, Alencar VB, Souza AKDN, Lins-Kusterer LEF, Azi LMTDA. Transdermal Opioids and the Quality of Life of the Cancer Patient: A Systematic Literature Review. Ann Pharmacother 2024:10600280241247363. [PMID: 38659244 DOI: 10.1177/10600280241247363] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/26/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This systematic literature review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of transdermal opioids in managing cancer pain and their impact on the quality of life (QoL) of patients. DATA SOURCES A systematic literature review conducted following the PRISMA protocol, focusing on randomized clinical trials found in the Lilacs, Embase, PubMed, and SciELO databases over the last 20 years. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION We included randomized clinical trials, published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish, which assessed the impact of transdermal opioids on the QoL. Data extraction was facilitated using the Rayyan app. DATA SYNTHESIS Six articles meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed. These studies covered a population ranging from 24 to 422 cancer patients experiencing moderate to severe pain. The risk of bias was assessed in each study, generally being categorized as uncertain or high. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE The findings indicate that the analgesic effectiveness and side effects of transdermal formulations (specifically buprenorphine and fentanyl) for managing moderate to severe cancer pain are comparable to, or in some cases superior to, those of oral opioids traditionally employed. CONCLUSIONS Transdermal therapy was suggested to have several advantages over oral opioid therapy in enhancing cancer patients' QoL. These benefits span various dimensions, including pain management, physical functioning, mental health, vitality, overall patient improvement, anger/aversion, strength/activity, general QoL, cognitive and emotional functions, fatigue, and insomnia.
Collapse
|
3
|
Mawatari H, Shinjo T, Morita T, Kohara H, Yomiya K. Revision of Pharmacological Treatment Recommendations for Cancer Pain: Clinical Guidelines from the Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine. J Palliat Med 2022; 25:1095-1114. [PMID: 35363057 DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2021.0438] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hironori Mawatari
- Department of Palliative and Supportive Care, Yokohama Minami Kyosai Hospital, Yokohama City, Japan
| | - Takuya Shinjo
- Department of Palliative Medicine, Shinjo Clinic, Kobe City, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Morita
- Department of Palliative and Supportive Care, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, Hamamatsu City, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Kohara
- Department of Palliative Medicine, Hiroshima Prefectural Hospital, Hiroshima City, Japan
| | - Kinomi Yomiya
- Department of Palliative Care, Saitama Cancer Center, Ina-machi, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Straube C, Derry S, Jackson KC, Wiffen PJ, Bell RF, Strassels S, Straube S. Codeine, alone and with paracetamol (acetaminophen), for cancer pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 2014:CD006601. [PMID: 25234029 PMCID: PMC6513650 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006601.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pain is very common in patients with cancer. Opioid analgesics, including codeine, play a significant role in major guidelines on the management of cancer pain, particularly for mild to moderate pain. Codeine is widely available and inexpensive, which may make it a good choice, especially in low-resource settings. Its use is controversial, in part because codeine is not effective in a minority of patients who cannot convert it to its active metabolite (morphine), and also because of concerns about potential abuse, and safety in children. OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and safety of codeine used alone or in combination with paracetamol for relieving cancer pain. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 2), MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to 5 March 2014, supplemented by searches of clinical trial registries and screening of the reference lists of the identified studies and reviews in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA We sought randomised, double-blind, controlled trials using single or multiple doses of codeine, with or without paracetamol, for the treatment of cancer pain. Trials could have either parallel or cross-over design, with at least 10 participants per treatment group. Studies in children or adults reporting on any type, grade, and stage of cancer were eligible. We accepted any formulation, dosage regimen, and route of administration of codeine, and both placebo and active controls. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently read the titles and abstracts of all studies identified by the searches and excluded those that clearly did not meet the inclusion criteria. For the remaining studies, two authors read the full manuscripts and assessed them for inclusion. We resolved discrepancies between review authors by discussion. Included studies were described qualitatively, since no meta-analysis was possible because of the small amount of data identified, and clinical and methodological between-study heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS We included 15 studies including 721 participants with cancer pain due to diverse types of malignancy. All studies were performed on adults; there were no studies on children. The included studies were of adequate methodological quality, but all except for one were judged to be at a high risk of bias because of small study size, and six because of methods used to deal with missing data or high withdrawal rates. Three studies used a parallel group design; the remainder were cross-over trials in which there was an adequate washout period, but only one reported results for treatment periods separately.Twelve studies used codeine as a single agent and three combined it with paracetamol. Ten studies included a placebo arm, and 14 included one or more of 16 different active drug comparators or compared different routes of administration. Most studies investigated the effect of a single dose of medication, while five used treatment periods of one, seven or 21 days. Most studies used codeine at doses of 30 mg to 120 mg.There were insufficient data for any pooled analysis. Only two studies reported our preferred responder outcome of 'participants with at least 50% reduction in pain' and two reported 'participants with no worse than mild pain'. Eleven studies reported treatment group mean measures of pain intensity or pain relief; overall for these outcome measures, codeine or codeine plus paracetamol was numerically superior to placebo and equivalent to the active comparators.Adverse event reporting was poor: only two studies reported the number of participants with any adverse event specified by treatment group and only one reported the number of participants with any serious adverse event. In multiple-dose studies nausea, vomiting and constipation were common, with somnolence and dizziness frequent in the 21-day study. Withdrawal from the studies, where reported, was less than 10% except in two studies. There were three deaths, in all cases due to the underlying cancer. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We identified only a small amount of data in studies that were both randomised and double-blind. Studies were small, of short duration, and most had significant shortcomings in reporting. The available evidence indicates that codeine is more effective against cancer pain than placebo, but with increased risk of nausea, vomiting, and constipation. Uncertainty remains as to the magnitude and time-course of the analgesic effect and the safety and tolerability in longer-term use. There were no data for children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carmen Straube
- University Medical Center GöttingenDepartment of Haematology and OncologyRobert‐Koch‐Straße 40GöttingenGermany37075
| | - Sheena Derry
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Kenneth C Jackson
- *US pharmaceutical company*625 Winter Wren LaneBlythewoodSouth CarolinaUSA29016
| | - Philip J Wiffen
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Rae Frances Bell
- Haukeland University HospitalRegional Centre of Excellence in Palliative CareBergenNorway
| | | | - Sebastian Straube
- University of AlbertaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Preventive Medicine5‐30 University Terrace8303‐112 StreetEdmontonABCanadaT6G 2T4
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wiffen PJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Impact of morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone or codeine on patient consciousness, appetite and thirst when used to treat cancer pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 2014:CD011056. [PMID: 24874470 PMCID: PMC6483540 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011056.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is increasing focus on providing high quality care for people at the end of life, irrespective of disease or cause, and in all settings. In the last ten years the use of care pathways to aid those treating patients at the end of life has become common worldwide. The use of the Liverpool Care Pathway in the UK has been criticised. In England the LCP was the subject of an independent review, commissioned by a Health Minister. The Neuberger Review acknowledged that the LCP was based on the sound ethical principles that provide the basis of good quality care for patients and families when implemented properly. It also found that the LCP often was not implemented properly, and had instead become a barrier to good care; it made over 40 recommendations, including education and training, research and development, access to specialist palliative care services, and the need to ensure care and compassion for all dying patients. In July 2013, the Department of Health released a statement that stated the use of the LCP should be "phased out over the next 6-12 months and replaced with an individual approach to end of life care for each patient".The impact of opioids was a particular concern because of their potential influence on consciousness, appetite and thirst in people near the end of life. There was concern that impaired patient consciousness may lead to an earlier death, and that effects of opioids on appetite and thirst may result in unnecessary suffering. This rapid review, commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research, used standard Cochrane methodology to examine adverse effects of morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, and codeine in cancer pain studies as a close approximation to possible effects in the dying patient. OBJECTIVES To determine the impact of opioid treatment on patient consciousness, appetite and thirst in randomised controlled trials of morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone or codeine for treating cancer pain. SEARCH METHODS We assessed adverse event data reported in studies included in current Cochrane reviews of opioids for cancer pain: specifically morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, and codeine. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised studies using multiple doses of four opioid drugs (morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, and codeine) in cancer pain. These were taken from four existing or ongoing Cochrane reviews. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. The primary outcomes sought were numbers of participants experiencing adverse events of reduced consciousness, appetite, and thirst. Secondary outcomes were possible surrogate measures of the primary outcomes: delirium, dizziness, hallucinations, mood change and somnolence relating to patient consciousness, and nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhoea, dyspepsia, dysphagia, anorexia, asthenia, dehydration, or dry mouth relating to appetite or thirst.Comparative measures of harm were known to be unlikely, and we therefore calculated the proportion of participants experiencing each of the adverse events of interest with each opioid, and for all four opioid drugs combined. MAIN RESULTS We included 77 studies with 5619 randomised participants. There was potential bias in most studies, with small size being the most common; individual treatment groups had fewer than 50 participants in 60 studies. Participants were relatively young, with mean age in the studies typically between 50 and 70 years. Multiple major problems with adverse event reporting were found, including failing to report adverse events in all participants who received medication, all adverse events experienced, how adverse events were collected, and not defining adverse event terminology or whether a reporting system was used.Direct measures of patient consciousness, patient appetite, or thirst were not apparent. For opioids used to treat cancer pain adverse event incidence rates were 25% for constipation, 23% for somnolence, 21% for nausea, 17% for dry mouth, and 13% for vomiting, anorexia, and dizziness. Asthenia, diarrhoea, insomnia, mood change, hallucinations and dehydration occurred at incidence rates of 5% and below. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found no direct evidence that opioids affected patient consciousness, appetite or thirst when used to treat cancer pain. However, somnolence, dry mouth, and anorexia were common adverse events in people with cancer pain treated with morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, or codeine.We are aware that there is an important literature concerning the problems that exist with adverse event measurement, reporting, and attribution. Together with the known complications concerning concomitant medication, data collection and reporting, and nomenclature, this means that these adverse events cannot always be attributed unequivocally to the use of opioids, and so they provide only a broad picture of adverse events with opioids in cancer pain. The research agenda includes developing definitions for adverse events that have a spectrum of severity or importance, and the development of appropriate measurement tools for recording such events to aid clinical practice and clinical research.
Collapse
|
6
|
Sigurdardottir KR, Oldervoll L, Hjermstad MJ, Kaasa S, Knudsen AK, Løhre ET, Loge JH, Haugen DF. How are palliative care cancer populations characterized in randomized controlled trials? A literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014; 47:906-914.e17. [PMID: 24018205 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.06.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2013] [Revised: 06/05/2013] [Accepted: 06/14/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT The difficulties in defining a palliative care patient accentuate the need to provide stringent descriptions of the patient population in palliative care research. OBJECTIVES To conduct a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying which key variables have been used to describe adult palliative care cancer populations in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS The data sources used were MEDLINE (1950 to January 25, 2010) and Embase (1980 to January 25, 2010), limited to RCTs in adult cancer patients with incurable disease. Forty-three variables were systematically extracted from the eligible articles. RESULTS The review includes 336 articles reporting RCTs in palliative care cancer patients. Age (98%), gender (90%), cancer diagnosis (89%), performance status (45%), and survival (45%) were the most frequently reported variables. A large number of other variables were much less frequently reported. CONCLUSION A substantial variation exists in how palliative care cancer populations are described in RCTs. Few variables are consistently registered and reported. There is a clear need to standardize the reporting. The results from this work will serve as the basis for an international Delphi process with the aim of reaching consensus on a minimum set of descriptors to characterize a palliative care cancer population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katrin Ruth Sigurdardottir
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Sunniva Centre for Palliative Care, Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Regional Centre of Excellence for Palliative Care, Western Norway, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
| | - Line Oldervoll
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Røros Rehabilitation Centre, Røros, Norway
| | - Marianne Jensen Hjermstad
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Regional Centre for Excellence in Palliative Care, South Eastern Norway, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Stein Kaasa
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Department of Oncology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Anne Kari Knudsen
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Department of Oncology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Erik Torbjørn Løhre
- Department of Oncology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Jon Håvard Loge
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; National Resource Centre for Late Effects After Cancer Treatment, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Dagny Faksvåg Haugen
- European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Regional Centre of Excellence for Palliative Care, Western Norway, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Opioid drugs have been used for many years to relieve pain. Transdermal fentanyl offers one option for delivering and maintaining pain relief in patients with moderate or severe cancer pain. OBJECTIVES To determine the analgesic efficacy of transdermal fentanyl for relief of cancer pain, and to assess the adverse events associated with the use of transdermal fentanyl for relief of cancer pain. SEARCH METHODS The following databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 4 of 12); MEDLINE (1966 to May 2013); EMBASE (1974 to May 2013; CANCERLIT (PubMED) (November 2012); and ClinicalTrials.gov (May 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA Published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using placebo or active comparators reporting on the analgesic effect of transdermal fentanyl in adults and children with cancer pain. Studies with fewer than 10 participants were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Data were extracted independently by two review authors. We extracted any available data on the number or proportion of patients with 'no worse than mild pain' or treatment success (very satisfied, or very good or excellent on patient global impression scales), together with information about adverse events and withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS We identified nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including a Turkish study that is awaiting formal translation. There were 1244 participants randomised in classically designed RCTs, of whom 1197 had evaluable data, and 138 patients enrolled in an enriched enrolment, randomised withdrawal (EERW) trial. Overall, 600 participants were treated with transdermal fentanyl patches, 382 with various formulations of morphine, 36 with methadone, and 221 with paracetamol plus codeine. There were major sources of potential bias, including lack of blinding, small size, high levels of attrition, and inconsistent reporting.We could not compare data in a meaningful analysis regarding adverse events such as nausea, abdominal pain, gastrointestinal bleeding, and confusion. These events may have been attributable to the underlying disease process.There were insufficient comparable data for meta-analysis to be undertaken or to produce numbers needed to treat (NNT) for the analgesic effect. In seven studies with 461 participants reporting pain intensity results after about two weeks, the mean or median pain scores were on the borderline of mild and moderate pain. Most participants would have had no worse than mild pain on treatment. Another reported that 77% of participants using transdermal fentanyl had an undefined successful outcome. Fewer participants experienced constipation with transdermal fentanyl (28%) than with oral morphine (46%), giving a risk ratio of 0.61 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.78); the NNT to prevent constipation was 5.5 (95% CI 3.8 to 10). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The randomised trial literature for effectiveness of transdermal fentanyl is limited, but it is an important medicine. Most studies recruited fewer than 100 participants and did not provide data appropriate for meta-analysis. Only a few reported how many patients had good pain relief but, where data were reported, a majority had no worse than mild pain within a reasonably short time period. The evidence pointed to a useful and significant reduction in complaints about constipation for transdermal fentanyl compared with oral morphine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gina Hadley
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical NeurosciencesPain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Sheena Derry
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - R Andrew Moore
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | - Philip J Wiffen
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordOxfordshireUKOX3 7LE
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Nabal M, Librada S, Redondo MJ, Pigni A, Brunelli C, Caraceni A. The role of paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in addition to WHO Step III opioids in the control of pain in advanced cancer. A systematic review of the literature. Palliat Med 2012; 26:305-12. [PMID: 22126843 DOI: 10.1177/0269216311428528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol are used widely in the management of mild to moderate cancer pain and are frequently combined with opioids in the treatment of moderate to severe pain. AIM To perform a systematic literature review of the evidence of the efficacy and toxicity of NSAIDs or paracetamol added to WHO Step III opioid treatment for cancer pain. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES A systematic literature review of MedLine, EMBASE and Cochrane Central register of controlled trials database was carried out using both text words and MeSH/EMTREE terms. RESULTS Seven eligible papers were retrieved from the new search and five from the Cochrane review. Five of seven studies showed an additive effect of NSAIDs when combined with opioids either by improving analgesia (three studies) or by reducing the opioid dose (two studies). Paracetamol was only marginally effective in one of five trials. The study designs were not adequate to assess differences in side effects between the opioids alone and opioids in combination with NSAIDs or paracetamol. CONCLUSIONS The evidence from the available clinical trials is of limited amount and quality, but it weakly supports the proposal that the addition of an NSAIDs to WHO Step III opioids can improve analgesia or reduce opioid dose requirement. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of paracetamol in combination with Step III opioids. Data on the toxicity of NSAIDs in this indication are insufficient owing to the small number of patients and the short duration of treatment reported in the studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Nabal
- Palliative Care Supportive Team, Hospital Universitario Arnau de Vilanova Lleida, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Murino P, Mammucari M, Borrelli D, Pepe A, Giugliano MF, Morra A, Panelli G, Manzo R, Ravo V, Muto P. Role of Immediate-Release Morphine (MIR) in the Treatment of Predictable Pain in Radiotherapy. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother 2011; 25:121-4. [DOI: 10.3109/15360288.2011.554488] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
10
|
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Prommer
- Department of Hematology/Oncology/Palliative Care, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Tharmalingam S, Chow E, Harris K, Hird A, Sinclair E. Quality of life measurement in bone metastases: A literature review. J Pain Res 2008; 1:49-58. [PMID: 21197288 PMCID: PMC3004617 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s4572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Quality of life (QOL) has become an important consideration in the care of patients with bone metastases as prevalence, incidence and patient survival are on the rise. As a result, more interventional studies now measure patient’s QOL as a meaningful endpoint. However, well-developed bone metastases specific quality of life instruments are lacking. A literature review was conducted to better understand the nature of QOL instruments used in bone metastases trials. A total of 47 articles evaluating QOL in patients with bone metastases were identified. Twenty-five different instruments were used to evaluate QOL with study-designed questionnaires and the EORTC QLQ-C30 being most commonly employed. Many studies used more than one scale or instrument to measure QOL. This makes it difficult to compare QOL in bone metastases patients across studies and come to any formal conclusions. Therefore, this review demonstrates the need to develop a bone module that can be used across countries in future clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sukirtha Tharmalingam
- Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Evaluation of a standardized internet-based and telephone-based patient monitoring system for pain therapy with transdermal fentanyl. Clin J Pain 2007; 23:804-11. [PMID: 18075409 DOI: 10.1097/ajp.0b013e3181565d04] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
The aim of the present observational 4-week study was to document the feasibility and utility of telephone-based or Internet-based pain monitoring in patients with chronic cancer or noncancer pain, such as nociceptive or neuropathic pain, using transdermal fentanyl. Pain intensity, treatment tolerability, activities of daily living, quality of life, and patient and physician satisfaction were evaluated in 60 (60% women, 42% opioid-naive) chronic pain patients who were switched from oral pain therapy to transdermal fentanyl therapy because of persisting severe pain. When the total dataset of all patient entries was analyzed, treatment with transdermal fentanyl led to decreases in maximal and mean pain scores as reported by the patients (-14% and -19%, respectively, last observation carried forward vs. baseline). Pain reduction was more pronounced in opioid-naive than in opioid-experienced patients (-35% and -25% vs. baseline, respectively; P=0.03). Overall, impairment of daily activities was reduced by 23% with transdermal fentanyl. No effect was observed with regard to quality of life and use of rescue pain medication. Transdermal fentanyl was generally well tolerated. Most patients (60%) preferred the telephone-based to the Internet-based or Internet combined with telephone questionnaires. Patient preference was driven by age, whereby younger patients tended to prefer the Internet and older patients the telephone (mean age, 45 and 54 y, respectively; difference n.s.). Internet-based and telephone-based monitoring of the efficacy and tolerability of opioid treatment for chronic pain was feasible in daily practice and generally well accepted by patients and physicians. Future research will determine the relative contribution of these 2 new options for patient-physician interaction and delineate their role in improving chronic pain control.
Collapse
|
13
|
Panzini I, Fioritti A, Gianni L, Tassinari D, Canuti D, Fabbri C, Rudnas B, Desiderio F, Ravaioli A. Quality of Life Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials. TUMORI JOURNAL 2006; 92:373-8. [PMID: 17168427 DOI: 10.1177/030089160609200501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Aims and Background According to the USA Food and Drug Administration, quality of life (QOL) and/or survival are a priority for new anticancer drug approval. This study was performed to review approaches to QOL in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs) and to survey the use of such measures in trials. Material and Methods A literature survey was carried out using the Medline/Medscape, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases. Included in the survey were all publications in the set period (from 1966 to June 2005) with “quality of life” in the title or in the abstract in the field of “randomized, controlled clinical trials”. Each trial was evaluated according to the level of importance of QOL as a measure of outcome (primary, important and secondary) and was analyzed using the quality scoring system reported by Nicolucci et al. with some items regarding QOL. Results Four hundred and five RCCT articles in the oncology setting were found. Fifty-six of the 405 (13.8%) publications had QOL as primary end point. The overall quality score of these trials ranged from 40% to 100%, with a median overall score of 80%. The overall score was correlated with the year of publication (P = 0.007), the type of journal (P = 0.05), the presence of a biostatistician among the authors (P = 0.001), and the number of participating institutions (P = 0.009). Conclusions More attention to QOL in all components of RCCTs (design, choice of instruments, data management and processing) is required from both clinicians and statisticians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilaria Panzini
- Department of Medical Oncology, Infermi Hospital, Rimini, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
This paper is the 27th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning over 30 years of research. It summarizes papers published during 2004 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia; stress and social status; tolerance and dependence; learning and memory; eating and drinking; alcohol and drugs of abuse; sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology; mental illness and mood; seizures and neurologic disorders; electrical-related activity and neurophysiology; general activity and locomotion; gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions; cardiovascular responses; respiration and thermoregulation; and immunological responses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard J Bodnar
- Department of Psychology and Neuropsychology Doctoral Sub-Program, Queens College, City University of New York, Flushing, NY 11367, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|