Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) for relief of breakthrough pain in opioid-treated patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled study

Pharmacotherapy for Spine-Related Pain in Older Adults

As the population ages, spine-related pain is increasingly common in older adults. While medications play an important role in pain management, their use has limitations in geriatric patients due to reduced liver and renal function, comorbid medical problems, and polypharmacy. This review will assess the evidence basis for medications used for spine-related pain in older adults, with a focus on drug metabolism and adverse drug reactions. A PubMed/OVID search crossing common spine, neck, and back pain terms with key words for older adults and geriatrics was combined with common drug classes and common drug names and limited to clinical trials and age over 65 years. The results were then reviewed with identification of commonly used drugs and drug categories: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, corticosteroids, gabapentin and pregabalin, antispastic and antispasmodic muscle relaxants, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tramadol, and opioids. Collectively, 138 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were the focus of the review. The review found a variable contribution of high-quality studies examining the efficacy of medications for spine pain primarily in the geriatric population. There was strong evidence for NSAID use with adjustments for gastrointestinal and renal risk factors. Gabapentin and pregabalin had mixed evidence for neuropathic pain. SNRIs had good evidence for neuropathic pain and a more favorable safety profile than TCAs. Tramadol had some evidence in older patients, but more so in persons aged < 65 years. Rational therapeutic choices based on geriatric spine pain diagnosis are helpful, such as NSAIDs and acetaminophen for arthritic and myofascial-based pain, gabapentinoids or duloxetine for neuropathic and radicular pain, antispastic agents for myofascial-based pain, and combination therapy for mixed etiologies. Tramadol can be well tolerated in older patients, but has risks of cognitive and classic opioid side effects. Otherwise, opioids are typically avoided in the treatment of spine-related pain in older adults due to their morbidity and mortality risk and are reserved for refractory severe pain. Whenever possible, beneficial geriatric spine pain pharmacotherapy should employ the lowest therapeutic doses with consideration of polypharmacy, potentially decreased renal and hepatic metabolism, and co-morbid medical disorders.

[Use of rapid-onset fentanyl preparations beyond indication : A random questionnaire survey among congress participants and pain physicians]

BACKGROUND

Despite publicised advice and warnings, there are only scant data on the non-indicated prescription of rapid-onset preparations of fentanyl (ROF) in non-cancer pain (NCP). Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation.

OBJECTIVE

Initiated by the Working Group Cancer Pain and supported by the German Pain Society, a random sample survey was conducted to assess the non-indicated use of ROF.

METHODS

The survey addressed attendees of pain conferences who were given the option to fill in the questionnaires outside the conference or online. Primary endpoints of the structured questionnaire were quantitative and qualitative items with regard to the prescription of ROF, while secondary endpoints were opioid-induced side effects.

RESULTS

Obtaining a response rate of 44% (132/300) and an additional 51 online questionnaires revealed that 165 (90%) respondents had knowledge of non-indicated prescriptions or were involved in these. Of these, 65% were clinicians and 17% worked in an outpatient capacity. In all, 22% were trained pain or palliative physicians. Approximately 1205 patients were assessed indirectly. The main causes for dispensing ROF included NCP entities such as back pain (44%), neuropathic pain (33%), head or facial pain (12%), and dyspnea (5%) in cancer pain or lack of break-through pain or basic medication (44%). Sedation (32%), nausea/vomiting (31%), constipation (16%) and insufficient analgesia (31%) were the mostly commonly reported adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Despite the non-ambiguous indication for ROF, physicians often demonstrate inappropriate prescription behaviour. Iatrogenic misuse of ROF should be minimized. The rates of adverse effects of ROF seems to be in line with other opioids.

Drug utilization study on immediate release Fentanyl in Spain. Prevalence, incidence, and indication

PURPOSE

We aimed to characterize the trends of immediate release fentanyl (IRF) use in Spain between 2012 and 2017 and indication for its use. IRF drugs are rapid-acting opioids approved to treat breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) in patients already receiving maintenance opioid therapy for chronic cancer pain. A substantial increase in consumption of IRF has been observed with emerging cases of abuse and dependence, most of them in noncancer patients.

METHODS

An ecological descriptive consumption study with aggregated data from drug dispensed by community pharmacies and reimbursed by the National Health System in which Defined Daily Doses per 10 000 inhabitants (DID) were calculated and a retrospective cohort study using data from the Spanish Database for Pharmacoepidemiological Research in Primary Care in which participants entered the cohort study after 1 year with the Primary Care Practitioners were performed. Annual prevalence and incidence rate of IRF use were estimated by sex and calendar year. Potential indication was also assessed.

RESULTS

IRF use in Spain increased from 2.1 DID in 2012 to 3.8 DID in 2017. The incidence rate and prevalence increased in 53% and 74%, respectively. Patients without previous cancer or BCTP diagnosis represented 27% of incident users, predominantly women. Half of patients with noncancer-related diagnosis had a musculoskeletal disorder linked to the first IRF prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

National consumption and new IRF users in Spain increased over the study period and one quarter of patients did not have a BTCP or cancer diagnosis registered in their clinical record.

Effectiveness of Risk Minimization Measures for Fentanyl Buccal Tablet (FENTORA) in Canada: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation Using Surveys, Medical Chart Records and Web Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT), a potent opioid, was approved in Canada in 2013 for breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant adult cancer patients. Additional risk minimization measures (aRMMs), consisting of communications to patients and healthcare providers (HCPs), were implemented from November 2014 through September 2015.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of FBT aRMMs as measured by prescriber knowledge, understanding, and behavior regarding key safety concerns (off-label use, use in non-opioid-tolerant patients, misuse/abuse/diversion, and drug-drug interaction) and to evaluate illicit FBT use.

METHODS

The study included three components: (1) a knowledge and understanding (KAU) survey of FBT prescribers conducted in two waves: November 2016-February 2017 and April-September 2018; (2) a retrospective prescription study of medical records of patients treated with FBT by a subgroup of prescribers from the KAU survey; and (3) Web surveillance of illicit FBT use in Canada using the search term FENTORA (May 2014-September 2018). The aRMMs were considered effective if the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval indicated that at least 65% of respondents met or partly met the knowledge objective for each key safety concern.

RESULTS

KAU survey: Of 46 eligible HCPs, 97.8% met or partly met the knowledge objective on use in breakthrough pain cancer patients, 97.8% on use in opioid-tolerant patients, 89.1% on dose and titration, 100% on abuse/addiction, and 58.7% on drug-drug interaction. Retrospective prescription study: Of 22 FBT-treated patients identified from 14 HCPs, 45.5% had cancer, 50.0% recorded a breakthrough pain indication, and 36.4% reported opioid tolerance; however, only 13.6% of patients were prescribed FBT according to the approved indication. Web surveillance: Of 932 FBT posts in Canada, only 40 (4.3%) mentioned illicit use.

CONCLUSIONS

The aRMMs as measured by the prescriber KAU were effective for most key safety messages; however, not all key messages of the aRMMs were stringently followed in routine practice.

A Descriptive Examination of Nonmedical Fentanyl Use in the United States: Characteristics of Use, Motives, and Consequences

Little is currently known about nonmedical fentanyl use (NFU; that is, use of illicit or pharmaceutically produced fentanyl without a prescription or in ways other than prescribed) despite increases in prevalence and consequences (e.g., overdose, fatality). Individuals with a lifetime history of NFU ( N = 122) in the United States completed an online survey assessing demographics and factors related to use. Results revealed diversion of prescriptions, unintentional use of illicit fentanyl, and high co-occurrence of mental illness and other illicit substance use among users. Commonly reported motives reflected negative/positive reinforcement (e.g., to relieve stress, to get high) and relieving pain/physical discomfort, regardless of frequency of use. More severe consequences (e.g., increased tolerance, withdrawal) were reported among high frequency users. This descriptive examination of NFU may aid in the identification of individuals at-risk for use, promote an understanding of reasons for use, and guide prevention and intervention developments.

Effect of Prophylactic Fentanyl Buccal Tablet on Episodic Exertional Dyspnea: A Pilot Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT

Episodic dyspnea is one of the most common, debilitating, and difficult-to-treat symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a pilot study to examine the effect of prophylactic fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) on exercise-induced dyspnea.

METHODS

In this parallel, double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial, opioid-tolerant patients were asked to complete a six-minute walk test (6MWT) at baseline and then a second 6MWT 30 minutes after a single dose of FBT (equivalent to 20-50% of their total opioid dose) or matching placebo. We compared dyspnea Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0-10, primary outcome), walk distance, vital signs, neurocognitive function, and adverse events between the two 6MWTs.

RESULTS

Among 22 patients enrolled, 20 (91%) completed the study. FBT was associated with a significant within-arm reduction in dyspnea NRS between 0 and six minutes (mean change -2.4, 95% CI -3.5, -1.3) and respiratory rate (mean change -2.6, 95% CI -4.7, -0.4). Placebo was also associated with a nonstatistically significant decrease in dyspnea (mean change -1.1). Between-arm comparison of dyspnea scores in the second 6MWT favored FBT, albeit not statistically significant (estimate -0.25, P = 0.068). Global impression revealed more patients in the FBT group than placebo group reporting their dyspnea was at least "somewhat better" in the second 6MWT (4 of 9 vs. 0 of 11, P = 0.03). The other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between arms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports that prophylactic FBT was associated with a reduction of exertional dyspnea and was well tolerated. Our findings support the need for larger trials to confirm the therapeutic potential of rapid-onset opioids.

Global cancer pain management: a systematic review comparing trials in Africa, Europe and North America

AIM

Despite the rise in cancer survivorship, few reviews have examined the quality of studies of cancer pain management and practices around the globe. With a void in trials spanning multiple geographical settings, this review evaluates the quality of cancer trials across three continents.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A literature review and search of established databases was conducted to identify eligible studies. The Cochrane method, the Jadad Score and a cancer pain-specific ad hoc tool were used to evaluate quality of studies.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies representing a total of 4693 individuals were included in the review. Study quality correlated positively with study sample size and palliative care index. Trials in all three continents were prone to use opioids for pain management, whereas trials in Europe and North America utilized other adjuvant therapies such as antidepressants and steroids.

CONCLUSION

This review underscores the need for better multidimensional quality assessment tools for cancer pain trials.

Safety concerns with long-term opioid use

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of opioid therapy must be balanced by any adverse effects. In recent years, prescription opioids have been increasingly prescribed, but have also been associated with increased abuse, overdose and death.

AREAS COVERED

This review will categorize the common risks of opioid administration. Recognized adverse effects of opioid therapy include constipation, tolerance, endocrinopathies, sleep disorders, cognitive effects, respiratory depression, overdose and addiction. Studies have shown that there is increased risk of overdose and death with higher daily opioid doses, particularly above a morphine equivalent oral daily dose of 100 milligrams. Extended-release/long acting (ER/LA) opioid formulations may be beneficial for the compliant patient, yet may expose a higher risk for abuse if used inappropriately since each tablet carries a larger dose of medication.

EXPERT OPINION

Prospective, controlled one-year trials are needed to establish the efficacy and safety profile of chronic opioid therapy. In addition to the well known side effects of chronic opioid therapy, the influence and serious effect of opioids on sleep and central sleep apnea is only recently being investigated. The lowest possible daily opioid must be used to manage chronic pain, and all clinicians should be cautious in the use of daily morphine equivalent doses above 50-100 milligrams.

The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials: a systematic review and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common and costly health complaint for which there are several moderately effective treatments. In some fields there is evidence that funder and financial conflicts are associated with trial outcomes. It is not clear whether effect sizes in back pain trials relate to journal impact factor, reporting conflicts of interest, or reporting funding.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of English-language papers reporting randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-specific low back pain, published between 2006-2012. We modelled the relationship using 5-year journal impact factor, and categories of reported of conflicts of interest, and categories of reported funding (reported none and reported some, compared to not reporting these) using meta-regression, adjusting for sample size, and publication year. We also considered whether impact factor could be predicted by the direction of outcome, or trial sample size.

RESULTS

We could abstract data to calculate effect size in 99 of 146 trials that met our inclusion criteria. Effect size is not associated with impact factor, reporting of funding source, or reporting of conflicts of interest. However, explicitly reporting 'no trial funding' is strongly associated with larger absolute values of effect size (adjusted β=1.02 (95 % CI 0.44 to 1.59), P=0.001). Impact factor increases by 0.008 (0.004 to 0.012) per unit increase in trial sample size (P<0.001), but does not differ by reported direction of the LBP trial outcome (P=0.270).

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of associations between effect size and impact factor, reporting sources of funding, and conflicts of interest reflects positively on research and publisher conduct in the field. Strong evidence of a large association between absolute magnitude of effect size and explicit reporting of 'no funding' suggests authors of unfunded trials are likely to report larger effect sizes, notwithstanding direction. This could relate in part to quality, resources, and/or how pragmatic a trial is.

Noninterventional study of transdermal fentanyl (fentavera) matrix patches in chronic pain patients: analgesic and quality of life effects

Fentanyl is considered to be an effective, transdermal treatment of chronic, cancer, and noncancer pain. This noninterventional, clinical practice-based study, on 426 patients attending 42 practices, assessed a proprietary, Aloe vera-containing, transdermal fentanyl matrix patch (Fentavera), for its analgesic effects, patients' quality of life (QoL) effects, tolerability, and adhesiveness. Study outcomes were mean changes from baseline of patient (11-point scales) and physician (5-point scales) ratings. After 1 and 2 months treatment, there were significant (P < 0.0001) decreases in patients' ratings of pain intensity, and impairment of walking, general activity, sleep quality, and QoL. For each parameter, the patient response rate was >30% at 2 months (response = 2-point decrease on 11-point rating scale). In a large majority of patients, the physicians rated the matrix patch as good or very good for analgesic effect, systemic and local tolerance, and adhesiveness. There were 30 adverse events in 4.2% of patients and analgesic comedications were reduced during treatment compared to before treatment. It is concluded, from this population-based data, that the proprietary, transdermal fentanyl matrix patch is effective and safe for chronic pain management in clinical practice, with significant positive analgesic and QoL effects, while being well tolerated and exhibiting good or very good adhesiveness.

Fentanyl buccal tablet versus oral oxycodone for Emergency Department treatment of musculoskeletal pain

Background: Emergency Department (ED) analgesia can potentially be delivered quickly using transbuccal administration. A previous study identified time-of-onset advantage of a 100 mcg fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) as compared to a dose of 5 mg oxycodone with 325 mg acetaminophen. The current study reports comparison of higher-dose (200 mcg) FBT as compared to a more commonly used oxycodone dose of 10 mg with 650 mg acetaminophen. Methods: Time frame: Patients were enrolled between October 2012 and October 2014.

Setting: The study was conducted in an urban teaching ED with annual census of 55,000.

Patients: The 50 convenience-sampled cases met eligibility criteria of age 18-60, with isolated orthopedic complaints; subjects required X-ray to rule-out fracture, and to have pain sufficient to warrant opioids.

Interventions: In this double-blind placebo-controlled analgesia trial, patients were randomized to one of two study groups. OXY subjects received two orally ingested tablets, each containing 5 mg oxycodone and 325 mg acetaminophen, and a transbuccal inactive comparator. FBT subjects received two placebo oral tablets and a 200 mcg FBT.

Data: The main study endpoint was achievement of at least two points' reduction in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) within ten minutes of study drug administration. NPRS was assessed at the time of study entry and every five minutes' post-drug administration for an hour. Secondary endpoints included assessment of side effects and subjects' desire to have the same medication for future similar pain.

Analysis: Categorical data were assessed with binomial exact 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Continuous data, after being demonstrated as non-normal with skewness-kurtosis testing, were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis testing. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to assess whether, after adjustment for potential confounders, there was a difference between FBT and OXY groups with respect to time to achieving significant analgesia. Results: Study groups were similar with respect to age (medians: OXY 34, FBT 38, p = 0.47), initial pain score (median 8 in each group), sex (proportion of males: OXY 64%, FBT 48%, p = 0.25), and ethnicity (proportion of whites: OXY 68%, FBT 56%, p = 0.38). The same proportion (52%) of OXY and FBT cases achieved significant reduction in pain within 15 minutes. Multivariate Cox regression adjusting for potential confounders confirmed (p = 0.28) no difference in rates of pain reduction between OXY and FBT. There were no major complications in either group. The majority of subjects in each group (80% in FBT group versus 76% in OXY group, p = 0.73) expressed high satisfaction and preference to receive the same regimen in future. Conclusion: This study's results suggest approximate equivalence between 200 mcg FBT and 10 mg oxycodone with 650 mg acetaminophen, with respect to time-to-analgesia, analgesic efficacy, side effects, and patient satisfaction.

Breakthrough pain management using fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) in combination with around-the-clock (ATC) opioids based on the efficacy and safety of FBT, and its relationship with ATC opioids: results from an open-label, multi-center study in Japanese cancer patients with detailed evaluation

Objective

Rapid analgesic onset opioids, particularly fentanyl buccal tablet, is preferable for managing breakthrough pain. The efficacy and safety of fentanyl buccal tablet and its association with around-the-clock opioids needs to be explored with an option of dose adjustments, more closely reflecting administration in clinical practice. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of fentanyl buccal tablet in breakthrough pain management in combination with around-the-clock opioids with the dose adjustment option, and explore the dose adjustment's influence on breakthrough pain management using detailed evaluation.

Methods

The 12-week open-label, multi-center study was conducted throughout Japan. Cancer patients aged 20 years or older, experiencing persistent pain controlled with around-the-clock opioids and breakthrough pain with supplemental medications were enrolled. Fentanyl buccal tablet and around-the-clock opioid doses could be adjusted under protocol-specified conditions. Efficacy variables were assessed at each fentanyl buccal tablet administration. Safety was assessed mainly by adverse events.

Results

All efficacy variables showed sustained analgesic effect. Nearly half the patients stayed on the same dose; most fentanyl buccal tablet administrations did not require additional supplemental medications. Dose increase of fentanyl buccal tablet and around-the-clock opioids seemed to improve breakthrough pain intensity and frequency, respectively. Fentanyl buccal tablet and around-the-clock opioid doses were not strongly associated. Treatment-related adverse events were all common with opioid treatment and did not increase over time.

Conclusions

Fentanyl buccal tablet can stably and safely manage breakthrough pain in cancer patients with independent dose adjustment based on detailed evaluation of each patient's condition. Breakthrough pain management using fentanyl buccal tablet with around-the-clock opioids at optimal doses may be an important factor in palliative care for cancer patients with breakthrough pain.

Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population

Background

Low Back Pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem, with variation in prevalence. Epidemiological reports of rating of pain intensity and location within the low back area are rare. The objective is to describe LBP in a large, multi-center, occupational cohort detailing both point and 1-month period prevalence of LBP by location and intensity measures at baseline.

Methods

In this cross-sectional report from a prospective cohort study, 828 participants were workers enrolled from 30 facilities performing a variety of manual material handling tasks. All participants underwent a structured interview detailing pain rating and location. Symptoms in the lower extremities, demographic and other data were collected. Body mass indices were measured. Outcomes are pain rating (0–10) in five defined lumbar back areas (i) LBP in the past month and (ii) LBP on the day of enrollment. Pain ratings were reported on a 0–10 scale and subsequently collapsed with ratings of 1–3, 4–6 and 7–10 classified as low, medium and high respectively.

Results

172 (20.8%) and 364 (44.0%) of the 828 participants reported pain on the day of enrollment or within the past month, respectively. The most common area of LBP was in the immediate paraspinal area with 130 (75.6%) participants with point prevalence LBP and 278 (77.4%) with 1-month period prevalence reported having LBP in the immediate paraspinal area. Among those 364 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain, ratings varied widely with 116 (31.9%) reporting ratings classified as low, 170 (46.7%) medium and 78 (21.4%) providing high pain ratings in any location. Among the 278 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain in the immediate paraspinal area, 89 (32.0%) reported ratings classified as low, 129 (46.4%), medium and 60 (21.6%) high pain ratings.

Conclusions

Pain ratings varied widely, however less variability was seen in pain location, with immediate paraspinal region being the most common. Variations may suggest different etiological factors related to LBP. Aggregation of different locations of pain or different intensities of pain into one binary classification of LBP may result in loss of information which may potentially be useful in prevention or treatment of LBP.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-283) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Efficacy and safety of sublingual fentanyl orally disintegrating tablets in patients with breakthrough pain: multicentre prospective study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of sublingual fentanyl oral disintegrating tablets (sublingual fentanyl ODT) for the treatment of breakthrough pain (BTP), cancer or non-cancer related, in terms of relief of pain intensity, adverse events (AEs) and patient satisfaction, and to further examine the clinical and epidemiological profile of patients with BTP in a clinical setting.

METHODS

A multicentre, prospective, open-label study was conducted in 19 pain units from Catalonia hospitals (Spain) over a 1-month period. Opioid-tolerant adult patients experiencing episodes of BTP intensity >5 on a visual analogue scale (VAS) during the 12-24 h before screening or AEs related to their previous rescue medication for BTP received sublingual fentanyl ODT in the course of routine clinical practice and completed a 30-day study period consisting of five assessment points: days 0 (baseline), 3, 7, 15 and 30. The efficacy was assessed by collecting pain intensity and pain relief data at baseline and at each assessment. AEs were recorded by investigators throughout the study during clinic visits and telephone follow-ups. For all patients, titration was begun with an initial dose of 100 μg. No more than two doses were allowed to treat an episode and patients might wait at least 4 h before treating another BTP episode with sublingual fentanyl ODT. The dose was increased by 100 μg multiples up to 400 μg as needed; and by 200 μg multiples up from 400 to 800 μg, the maximum titration step.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patients were enrolled and 177 (97.2 %) completed the study: 37 had breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) and 145 had breakthrough non-cancer pain (BTncP). The mean pain intensity showed a statistically significant improvement at the first assessment point and at all assessments thereafter (p < 0.0001). At the end of the study, the time lag between administration and first effect of sublingual fentanyl ODT was ≤10 min in 69.0 % (60 % BTcP and 71.2 % BTncP). The number of daily BTP episodes decreased in both groups, but it was statistically significant in BTcP. 114 patients (62.64 %) experienced AEs during the study. AEs recorded included nausea, vomiting, somnolence and constipation, and seven (4.49 %) were considered severe. No death or discontinuation was considered related to AEs.

CONCLUSION

Sublingual fentanyl ODT provided rapid and consistent relief from BTP, both in cancer and non-cancer patients. It was well-tolerated and well-accepted by patients in routine clinical practice.

[Chronic non-cancer-related pain. Long-term treatment with rapid-release and short-acting opioids in the context of misuse and dependency]

Annually published data show a continual increase in the volume of opioid prescriptions in Germany, thus indicating an intensification of opioid therapy. The majority of opioids are prescribed to treat chronic non-cancer-related pain. On the basis of current guidelines, as well as in terms of the lack of data regarding long-term use of opioids and their effectiveness beyond a period of 3 months, this development must be viewed critically. With reference to four case reports, we discuss and evaluate opioid therapy in relation to medication misuse and the development of drug dependency. Particular emphasis is placed on the administration of rapid-release and short-acting opioid preparations, which we consider to be particularly problematic.

Clinical pharmacology of fentanyl buccal tablet for the treatment of breakthrough pain

Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) is a new formulation of fentanyl providing rapid-onset analgesia for the treatment of breakthrough pain. FBT has been approved for the management of breakthrough pain in patients with cancer who are already receiving and who are tolerant to opioid therapy for underlying persistent pain. FBT has demonstrated a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, which is closely aligned to the rapid onset and duration of an episode of breakthrough pain, and is generally safe and well tolerated.

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of prescription opioids, including abuse-deterrent formulations, in non-cancer pain management

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare safety and efficacy outcomes between opioids formulated with technologies designed to deter or resist tampering (i.e., abuse-deterrent formulations [ADFs]) and non-ADFs for commonly prescribed opioids for treatment of non-cancer pain in adults.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for opioid publications between September 1, 2001 and August 31, 2011, and pivotal clinical trials from all years; abstracts from key pain conferences (2010-2011) were also reviewed. One hundred and ninety-one publications were initially identified, 68 of which met eligibility criteria and were systematically reviewed; a subset of 16 involved a placebo group (13 non-ADFs vs placebo, 3 ADFs vs placebo) and reported both efficacy and safety outcomes, and were included for a meta-analysis. Summary estimates of standardized difference in mean change of pain intensity (DMCPI), standardized difference in sum of pain intensity difference (DSPID), and odds ratios (ORs) of each adverse event (AE) were computed through random-effects estimates for ADFs (and non-ADFs) vs placebo. Indirect treatment comparisons were conducted to compare ADFs and non-ADFs.

RESULTS

Summary estimates for standardized DMCPI and for standardized DSPID indicated that ADFs and non-ADFs showed significantly greater efficacy than placebo in reducing pain intensity. Indirect analyses assessing the efficacy outcomes between ADFs and non-ADFs indicated that they were not significantly different (standardized DMCPI [0.39 {95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00-0.76}]; standardized DSPID [-0.22 {95% CI -0.74 to 0.30}]). ADFs and non-ADFs both were associated with higher odds of AEs than placebo. Odds ratios from indirect analyses comparing AEs for ADFs vs non-ADFs were not significant (nausea, 0.87 [0.24-3.12]; vomiting, 1.54 [0.40-5.97]; dizziness/vertigo, 0.61 [0.21-1.76]; headache, 1.42 [0.57-3.53]; somnolence/drowsiness, 0.47 [0.09-2.58]; constipation, 0.64 [0.28-1.49]; pruritus 0.41 [0.05-3.51]).

CONCLUSION

ADFs and non-ADFs had comparable efficacy and safety profiles, while both were more efficacious than placebo in reducing pain intensity.

Opioids compared to placebo or other treatments for chronic low-back pain

BACKGROUND

The use of opioids in the long-term management of chronic low-back pain (CLBP) has increased dramatically. Despite this trend, the benefits and risks of these medications remain unclear. This review is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of opioids in adults with CLBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We electronically searched the Cochrane Back Review Group's Specialized Register, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from January 2006 to October 2012. We checked the reference lists of these trials and other relevant systematic reviews for potential trials for inclusion.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the use of opioids (as monotherapy or in combination with other therapies) in adults with CLBP that were at least four weeks in duration. We included trials that compared non-injectable opioids to placebo or other treatments. We excluded trials that compared different opioids only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data onto a pre-designed form. We pooled results using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.2. We reported on pain and function outcomes using standardized mean difference (SMD) or risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We used absolute risk difference (RD) with 95% CI to report adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials (5540 participants). Tramadol was examined in five trials (1378 participants); it was found to be better than placebo for pain (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.44; low quality evidence) and function (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07; moderate quality evidence). Transdermal buprenorphine (two trials, 653 participants) may make little difference for pain (SMD -2.47, 95%CI -2.69 to -2.25; very low quality evidence), but no difference compared to placebo for function (SMD -0.14, 95%CI -0.53 to 0.25; very low quality evidence). Strong opioids (morphine, hydromorphone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, and tapentadol), examined in six trials (1887 participants), were better than placebo for pain (SMD -0.43, 95%CI -0.52 to -0.33; moderate quality evidence) and function (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.15; moderate quality evidence). One trial (1583 participants) demonstrated that tramadol may make little difference compared to celecoxib (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.90; very low quality evidence) for pain relief. Two trials (272 participants) found no difference between opioids and antidepressants for either pain (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.45; very low quality evidence), or function (SMD -0.11, 95% -0.63 to 0.42; very low quality evidence). The included trials in this review had high drop-out rates, were of short duration, and had limited interpretability of functional improvement. They did not report any serious adverse effects, risks (addiction or overdose), or complications (sleep apnea, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, hypogonadism). In general, the effect sizes were medium for pain and small for function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence (very low to moderate quality) for short-term efficacy (for both pain and function) of opioids to treat CLBP compared to placebo. The very few trials that compared opioids to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or antidepressants did not show any differences regarding pain and function. The initiation of a trial of opioids for long-term management should be done with extreme caution, especially after a comprehensive assessment of potential risks. There are no placebo-RCTs supporting the effectiveness and safety of long-term opioid therapy for treatment of CLBP.

Pharmacokinetics of non-intravenous formulations of fentanyl

Fentanyl was structurally designed by Paul Janssen in the early 1960s as a potent opioid analgesic (100-fold more potent than morphine). It is a full agonist at μ-opioid receptors and possesses physicochemical properties, in particular a high lipophilicity (octanol:water partition coefficient >700), which allow it to cross quickly between plasma and central nervous target sites (transfer half-life of 4.7-6.6 min). It undergoes first-pass metabolism via cytochrome P450 3A (bioavailability ~30 % after rapid swallowing), which can be circumvented by non-intravenous formulations (bioavailability 50-90 % for oral transmucosal or intranasal formulations). Non-intravenous preparations deliver fentanyl orally-transmucosally, intranasally or transdermally. Passive transdermal patches release fentanyl at a constant zero-order rate for 2-3 days, making them suitable for chronic pain management, as are iontophoretic transdermal systems. Oral transmucosal and intranasal routes provide fast delivery (time to reach maximum fentanyl plasma concentrations 20 min [range 20-180 min] and 12 min [range 12-21 min], respectively) suitable for rapid onset of analgesia in acute pain conditions with time to onset of analgesia of 5 or 2 min, respectively. Intranasal formulations partly bypass the blood-brain barrier and deliver a fraction of the dose directly to relevant brain target sites, providing ultra-fast analgesia for breakthrough pain. Thanks to the development of non-intravenous pharmaceutical formulations, fentanyl has become one of the most successful opioid analgesics, and can be regarded as an example of a successful reformulation strategy of an existing drug based on pharmacokinetic research and pharmaceutical technology. This development broadened the indications for fentanyl beyond the initial restriction to intra- or perioperative clinical uses. The clinical utility of fentanyl could be expanded further by more comprehensive mathematical characterizations of its parametric pharmacokinetic input functions as a basis for the rational selection of fentanyl formulations for individualized pain therapy.

Fentanyl for the treatment of tumor-related breakthrough pain

BACKGROUND

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is common among cancer patients and markedly lowers their quality of life. The treatment for BTCP episodes that is recommended in current guidelines involves extended-release formulations in combination with rapid-onset and short-acting opioids. In the past few years, several new preparations of fentanyl, an opioid with a very rapid onset, have been approved for this indication. Treating physicians need to be aware of the clinical differences between the newer fentanyl preparations and immediate-release opioids.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fentanyl for buccal, sublingual or intranasal administration in comparison with other opioids or a different fentanyl preparation for the treatment of BTCP.

RESULTS

In 6 trials of buccal, sublingual or intranasal fentanyl versus oral immediate-release opioids for the treatment of BTCP episodes, the use of fentanyl was associated with significantly less intense pain. In particular, fentanyl more often lowered the intensity of pain by at least 33% (range between studies: 13% to 57%) or by at least 50% (range between studies: 9% to 38%) within 15 minutes. Please change to "versus" if you agree.] Dose titration should begin at the lowest dose. When one fentanyl preparation is exchanged for another, the effective dose will probably differ.

CONCLUSION

The newer fentanyl preparations extend the treatment options for BTCP. They relieve pain within a short time better than conventional, immediate-release oral opioids do and may therefore be very helpful for patients with suddenly arising, intense, and short-lasting BTCP episodes. Further comparative trials are urgently needed.

Considerations in selecting rapid-onset opioids for the management of breakthrough pain

Breakthrough pain (BTP) is a transitory pain that occurs despite the use of long-term, around-the-clock analgesia. It is highly prevalent in certain populations and places a significant burden on patients, their families, caregivers, and health-care systems. Despite its prevalence and impact, BTP is sometimes unrecognized and often undertreated. Various formulations of fentanyl – a rapid-onset opioid with short duration of action – are available for the management of BTP. The efficacy of formulations using transmucosal, transbuccal, sublingual, and intranasal administration routes has been demonstrated for BTP treatment in clinical trials. However, a lack of head-to-head trials evaluating their relative efficacy makes it challenging for physicians to reach informed decisions on the most efficacious intervention for individual patients. In the absence of clear data on the relative efficacy of fentanyl formulations, prescribing decisions need to be based on physician understanding and experience and product cost and availability, taking into account the individual patient’s needs, the ability of the patient or caregivers to administer medication, and the patient’s wishes. This review evaluates current pharmacologic methods of alleviating BTP and discusses factors that should be considered when selecting the most appropriate formulation for individual patients. With the range of fentanyl formulations available, it is now possible to successfully address BTP in the majority of patients.

Increase in opiate prescription in Germany between 2000 and 2010: a study based on insurance data

BACKGROUND

Insufficient data have been available to date on the prevalence of opioid treatment in Germany, physicians' prescribing habits, and the percentages of cancer patients and non-cancer patients among those receiving opioids for an evaluation of the quality of care and an assessment of possible underuse or misuse.

METHODS

The data analyzed in this study were derived from the statutory health insurance sample of the AOK health insurance company in the German state of Hesse / ASHIP Hesse for the years 2000-2010. For the purpose of this study, prevalence was defined as the percentage of insurees who received at least one outpatient prescription of an opioid (ATC N02A, excluding codeine, levomethadone and methadone). In order to control for population aging, the prevalence was standardized to the German population on December 31(st) of the preceding year and to the age-structure of the population as it was in 1999. Opioid prescribing for cancer was assumed when a cancer diagnosis was documented in the same year in which the opioid prescription was issued.

RESULTS

The percentage of insurees receiving at least one opioid prescription rose over the period of the study from 3.31% in 2000 to 4.53% in 2010, a relative gain of 37%. Opioids were mostly prescribed to patients with non-cancer pain (2010: about 77% of opioid recipients). The percentage of non-cancer patients receiving long-term opioid treatment has also increased over the period of the study.

CONCLUSION

As opioids are frequently prescribed for non-cancer pain, it cannot be inferred from the observed increase in opioid prescribing that cancer patients are now receiving better opioid treatment than they were before. Further issues of concern are the observed increases in the prescribing of potent immediate release opioids and in the long-term opioid treatment for non-cancer patients, the benefit of which is currently debated.

Fentanyl (transmucosal)

Therapeutic Reviews aim to provide essential independent information for health professionals about drugs used in palliative and hospice care. Additional content is available on www.palliativedrugs.com. Country-specific books (Hospice and Palliative Care Formulary USA, and Palliative Care Formulary, British and Canadian editions) are also available and can be ordered from www.palliativedrugs.com. The series editors welcome feedback on the articles (hq@palliativedrugs.com).

A physician-driven solution--the Association for Medical Ethics, the Physician Payment Sunshine Act, and ethical challenges in pain medicine

The practice of contemporary pain medicine is laced with a number of significant ethical challenges. Considerable difficulties include the overutilization of interventional procedures, the application of under-evidenced treatment modalities, and potentially superfluous opioid prescribing. As with many other fields in medicine, including orthopedic surgery, relationships with industry are both common and pervasive, and influence our medical practice through education, publications, and research. This article highlights these ethical challenges and broaches several physician-driven solutions: The Association for Medical Ethics, the Physicians Payment Sunshine inspired by it, and other non-legislative reforms are discussed.

A comprehensive review of rapid-onset opioids for breakthrough pain

Breakthrough pain (BTP) is a transitory pain (reaching maximum severity in ~15 minutes and lasting ~60 minutes in patients with cancer) that occurs despite the management of chronic pain with long-term around-the-clock analgesia. BTP occurs in 33-65% of patients with chronic cancer pain and in ~70% of patients with chronic noncancer pain. BTP has historically been managed with short-acting opioids; however, these medications have a pharmacokinetic profile that does not correlate with the sudden onset and short time to maximum severity of BTP. Interest in rapid-onset opioids to relieve BTP has therefore been growing. This comprehensive review aims to summarize the currently available clinical data for the approved rapid-onset opioids, which comprise different formulations of fentanyl, a μ-opioid receptor agonist with anaesthetic and analgesic properties. Administration routes for fentanyl in the management of BTP currently include the transmucosal and intranasal routes; an intrapulmonary formulation is also in development. The findings of this review suggest that the efficacy and safety of the approved rapid-onset opioids are comparable.

Fentanyl for breakthrough pain: a systematic review

The purpose of this article is to systematically review the use of fentanyl as an analgesic for breakthrough pain. This article found that the oral transmucosal fentanyl (OTFC) had a quicker onset to analgesia than oral immediate-release opioids. Intranasal fentanyl (INFS) had a quicker onset to analgesia than buccal tablets, which in turn had a quicker onset to analgesia than OTFC. Patient acceptance and global rating of efficacy were greater for INFS than for buccal fentanyl. OTFC and INFS have been used effectively to reduce acute pain in children who are opioid-naive. Abuse and addiction to OTFC, fentanyl buccal tablets and INFS was low, owing to patient selection.

A comparison between enriched and nonenriched enrollment randomized withdrawal trials of opioids for chronic noncancer pain

BACKGROUND

An enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal (EERW) design excludes potential participants who are nonresponders or who cannot tolerate the experimental drug before random assignment. It is unclear whether EERW design has an influence on the efficacy and safety of opioids for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP).

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to compare the results from EERW and non-EERW trials of opioids for CNCP. Secondary objectives were to compare weak versus strong opioids, subgroups of patients with different types of pain, and the efficacy of opiods compared with placebo versus other drugs.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched up to July 2009, for randomized controlled trials of any opioid for CNCP. Metaanalyses and meta-regressions were conducted to compare the results. Treatment efficacy was assessed by effect sizes (small, medium and large) and the incidence of adverse effects was assessed by a clinically relevant mean difference of 10% or greater.

RESULTS

Sixty-two randomized trials were included. In 61 trials, the duration was less than 16 weeks. There was no difference in efficacy between EERW and non-EERW trials for both pain (P=0.6) and function (P=0.3). However, EERW trials failed to detect a clinically relevant difference for nausea, vomiting, somnolence, dizziness and dry skin⁄itching compared with non-EERW. Opioids were more effective than placebo in patients with nociceptive pain (effect size=0.60, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.72) and neuropathic pain (effect size=0.56, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.73).

CONCLUSION

EERW trial designs appear not to bias the results of efficacy, but they underestimate the adverse effects. The present updated meta- analysis shows that weak and strong opioids are effective for CNCP of both nociceptive and neuropathic origin.

Fentanyl buccal tablets for the treatment of breakthrough pain

SUMMARY Fentanyl buccal tablets (FBT) have been designed to treat breakthrough pain (BTP) in patients who are already receiving, and who are tolerant to, opioid therapy for their underlying persistent pain. FBT are a formulation that uses an effervescent drug delivery system to enhance penetration across the buccal mucosa. OraVescent technology provides an effervescent reaction that liberates carbon dioxide in the buccal cavity. This reaction causes an initial decrease in pH, which facilitates solubilization, thus driving fentanyl into solution. Subsequently, carbon dioxide increases the local pH, which facilitates permeation of unionised fentanyl across the buccal mucosa. In clinical studies of opioid-tolerant patients with cancer and noncancer-related BTP, FBT have provided consistent and clinically relevant improvements in pain intensity and pain relief relative to placebo and oral opioids like oxycodone. The safety and tolerability profile is generally typical of that observed with other opioids. The pharmacokinetic properties of FBT allow for a meaningful clinical efficacy, with an onset of action that closely matches the onset of BTP. FBT, as with any other transmucosal preparations of fentanyl, should not be used in patients who are not opioid-tolerant.

Pharmacokinetics of fentanyl buccal tablet: a pooled analysis and review

Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) is indicated for the treatment of breakthrough pain in patients who are already receiving and are tolerant to opioid therapy for underlying, persistent cancer pain. FBT is designed to enhance the rate and efficiency of absorption of fentanyl through the buccal mucosa. FBT was shown to be dose proportional from 100 to 1,300 μg. This analysis provides an overview of the pharmacokinetic profile of FBT based on pooled data from nine pharmacokinetic studies. In all, 365 healthy non-opioid-tolerant adults receiving naltrexone were included in the analysis. Single-dose (100 to 1,300 μg) pharmacokinetic parameters were dose normalized to 100 μg. Pharmacokinetic measures included maximum observed plasma drug concentration (C(max)), plasma drug concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(0-∞)), time to reach C(max) (T(max)), apparent plasma terminal elimination rate constant, and elimination half-life. After FBT administration, fentanyl was rapidly absorbed, with T(max) ranging from 20 minutes to 4 hours postdose. Mean AUC(0-∞) was 1.49 ng•hour/mL, and mean C(max) was 0.237 ng/mL. However, plasma fentanyl concentration reached 80% of C(max) within 25 minutes and was maintained through 2 hours after administration. Based on the individual studies, bioequivalence was shown for sublingual and buccal tablet placement, and no significant effect of dwell time (duration of FBT presence in the oral cavity) was observed. The pharmacokinetic profile of FBT was characterized by rapid absorption, which is consistent with the rapid-onset efficacy profile of FBT observed in clinical studies.

Long-term dosing, safety, and tolerability of fentanyl buccal tablet in the management of noncancer-related breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term dosing, safety, and tolerability of fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) in a large cohort of opioid-tolerant patients with chronic noncancer pain and breakthrough pain (BTP).

DESIGN

Combined analysis of three double-blind, placebo-controlled, and two open-label studies.

RESULTS

Of 1160 patients who received ≥1 dose of FBT, 83% achieved a successful dose, ranging from 100 to 800 μg, mostly at 600 or 800 μg. Not all of the patients included in this analysis were enrolled in long-term studies and 156 (13%) patients were still receiving ongoing treatment when their study site closed. Median treatment duration was 106.0 days. The mean FBT dose in the post-titration population (n = 946) increased from 2108 to 3132 μg/day, with ≥1 FBT dose increase in 27% of patients; most dose increases occurred during the first 6 months. The FBT daily dose as a proportion of the daily opioid dose remained fairly stable (59-65%) throughout the treatment period. Overall, 925 (80%) enrolled patients had ≥1 adverse event (AE). The most frequent AEs were nausea (21% of patients), vomiting (11%), dizziness (10%), and headache (10%). Common AEs generally occurred within 7 days of starting treatment and lasted for ≤2 days. Serious AEs occurred in 136 (12%) patients and included six deaths (none related to FBT) and 11 instances of opioid overdose (all with satisfactory resolution). AE-related discontinuations occurred in 163 (14%) patients and were similar to the common AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limitations, including the controlled clinical setting, this pooled analysis of several clinical studies provides valuable information for the long-term management of BTP with FBT. Patients require regular evaluation and, when necessary, adjustment of opioid medications to maintain adequate pain control. FBT was generally safe and well tolerated in this setting.

The efficacy and safety of fentanyl buccal tablet compared with immediate-release oxycodone for the management of breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Current clinical guidelines have identified the need for studies comparing the effect of different short-acting or rapid-onset opioids for the treatment of breakthrough pain (BTP). In this study we evaluated the efficacy and safety of treatment with fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) in comparison with immediate-release oxycodone in alleviating BTP in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

In this cross-over design study, opioid-tolerant patients were randomized to open-label titration with FBT (200, 400, 600, 800 μg) followed by oxycodone (15, 30, 45, 60 mg) or vice versa for the management of BTP. After titration to a successful dose of both study drugs, patients were rerandomized to double-blind treatment for 10 BTP episodes with 1 of the already identified successful doses of study drug followed by cross-over to double-blind treatment for 10 BTP episodes with the other study drug. The primary efficacy measure was the difference in pain intensity (based on an 11-point numerical scale) 15 minutes after administration of study drug (PID(15)). Other efficacy measures included PID at other time points postdose (5 through 60 minutes), the sum of pain intensity differences (SPID) at 30 and 60 minutes postdose, pain relief (5 through 60 minutes), proportion of BTP episodes for which patients experienced meaningful reduction in pain intensity, and patient preference for BTP medication. Adverse events were also recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 323 patients enrolled, 203 achieved a successful dose of both study drugs, 191 completed the titration phase, and 180 completed the double-blind phase. PID(15) was significantly greater after FBT versus oxycodone (mean [SD], 0.82 [1.12] vs. 0.60 [0.88]; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.18, 0.29; P < 0.0001). Secondary efficacy measures favored FBT and showed differences versus oxycodone from 5 minutes postdose for PID and 10 minutes postdose for pain relief. SPID(30) and SPID(60) were greater with FBT than with oxycodone (P < 0.0001 for both measures). A ≥33% improvement in pain intensity occurred in a larger proportion of FBT-treated episodes versus oxycodone beginning 15 through 45 minutes postdose (P < 0.05). FBT was preferred by 52% of patients, oxycodone by 33%. Adverse events with both study drugs were generally typical of opioids, and the majority occurred during titration. Two serious adverse events (pneumonia) were reported in 1 patient; both occurrences were considered unrelated to study drug.

CONCLUSION

FBT resulted in more rapid onset of analgesia and was generally well tolerated in comparison with oxycodone for the treatment of BTP in opioid-tolerant patients.

Aberrant drug-related behavior observed during clinical studies involving patients taking chronic opioid therapy for persistent pain and fentanyl buccal tablet for breakthrough pain

CONTEXT

Information on aberrant drug-related behaviors in the clinical study setting is limited.

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective analysis was designed to identify the types and frequency of aberrant drug-related behaviors (including misuse and abuse) and associated patient characteristics in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

Data from opioid-tolerant patients participating in clinical studies of fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) for breakthrough pain (up to 18 months of clinical study case-report forms) were retrospectively reviewed and coded for abuse, overdose, and aberrant behavior. Aberrant behaviors were categorized as those involving FBT (overuse, lost or stolen study drug) and those not involving FBT (patients seeking prescriptions from other sources, not returning for follow-up).

RESULTS

Of the 1,160 patients evaluated, 10 (<1%) patients had an abuse-related event, 18 (<2%) had a positive urine drug screening (nonprescribed drug or illicit substance), and 12 (1%) had an event consistent with opioid overdose; 124 (11%) had aberrant behaviors related to FBT, and 68 (6%) had aberrant behaviors that were not. Aberrant behaviors were more frequent in men (odds ratio [OR]: 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1, 2.1; P<0.01), in patients 42 years or younger (OR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.6, 4.0; P<0.01), and in patients 43 years to 49 years (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 3.1; P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of drug abuse events and aberrant drug-related behaviors was relatively low, probably because of the implementation of universal precautions and the controlled clinical study setting. Even in this setting, events occurred, highlighting the limits of screening and the need for ongoing monitoring of aberrant behavior.

Long-term safety and tolerability of fentanyl buccal tablet for the treatment of breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain: an 18-month study

CONTEXT

Breakthrough pain (BTP) is highly prevalent in patients with chronic cancer and noncancer pain, commonly requiring treatment with short-acting or rapid-onset opioids. This is the first report of an analysis of long-term safety from combined clinical trials of a rapid-onset transmucosal formulation of fentanyl, the fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT).

OBJECTIVES

This long-term (18-month), open-label study assessed the safety and tolerability of FBT for the treatment of BTP in a large cohort (n=646) of opioid-tolerant patients receiving around-the-clock (ATC) opioids for persistant noncancer pain.

METHODS

This was a long-term, multicenter, open-label safety study that accepted patients naïve to FBT (new patients) as well as rollover patients from one of two previous short-term, randomized, placebo-controlled studies involving opioid-tolerant adults with chronic noncancer pain. All patients gave written informed consent, and the study was conducted according to Good Clinical Practice and with Independent Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board approval.

RESULTS

During maintenance treatment, 70 of 646 patients (11%) discontinued because of adverse events (AEs), 69 of 646 (11%) because of withdrawn consent, and 57 of 646 (9%) because of noncompliance. A total of 571 of 646 patients (88%) had one or more AEs; most were mild to moderate in intensity and typical of AEs associated with opioid use in a noncancer chronic pain population. Serious AEs were seen in 118 of 646 patients (18%); most were considered by the investigators to be unrelated or unlikely to be related to FBT. There were six deaths (three myocardial infarction, two cardiac arrest, and one pneumonia) that were considered by investigators to be unrelated or unlikely to be related to FBT. There were two reports of accidental overdose contained within nine reports of nonfatal overdose (FBT and/or ATC and/or other medications). Four patients had AEs of abuse or drug dependence, two in association with FBT. Drug withdrawal syndrome occurred in 23 patients after discontinuation of FBT alone or in combination with other opioids. Secondary assessments showed that average pain ratings, as assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory, remained relatively stable throughout the study and that consistent improvements were noted in functional measures.

CONCLUSION

FBT was generally safe and well tolerated, with self-reported functional improvement observed in most of the opioid-tolerant patients with BTP in association with chronic noncancer pain.

Treatment of breakthrough pain with fentanyl buccal tablet in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain: appropriate patient selection and management

BACKGROUND

Opioids can be a safe and effective option for carefully selected patients with a structured treatment program that includes consistent monitoring. However, the benefits and risks of opioid therapy for patients with chronic pain, and society as a whole, have been sharply debated. A key component of this debate has involved the administration of rapid-onset opioids for the management of breakthrough pain.

OBJECTIVE

Review key aspects of breakthrough pain management with fentanyl buccal tablet, with a focus on minimizing risk to optimize therapeutic outcomes. Recommendations that apply broadly to all rapid-onset opioids are also discussed.

DESIGN

Available fentanyl buccal tablet clinical and post-marketing data were reviewed.

RESULTS

Like other schedule II controlled substances, and because fentanyl buccal tablet is a highly potent opioid, its use is associated with risk of overdose, misuse, and diversion. As with all rapid-onset opioids, particular attention to patient selection and risk assessment is warranted. The inclusion and exclusion criteria in fentanyl buccal tablet clinical studies represent patient selection standards that should be translated to clinical practice, most importantly, that patients are opioid-tolerant before fentanyl buccal tablet initiation. Titration of fentanyl buccal tablet from a low starting dose to a successful dose allows the safe identification of a dose that provides the greatest pain relief without unacceptable adverse events. After initiating fentanyl buccal tablet therapy, all patients should continue to be regularly monitored for response, including analgesia, functioning, tolerability, and aberrant behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

Fentanyl buccal tablet can be an effective and generally safe treatment for breakthrough pain when appropriate patient selection, administration, dosing, and monitoring are applied.

A novel 12-week study, with three randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled periods to evaluate fentanyl buccal tablets for the relief of breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients with noncancer-related chronic pain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the time of onset, overall efficacy, and safety of fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) for noncancer-related breakthrough pain (BTP) in opioid-tolerant adults over 12 weeks.

DESIGN

A novel 12-week study that mimicked clinical practice with dose titration to effective dose, open-label treatment, and three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-crossover periods at weeks 4, 8, and 12. For each double-blind period, study patients received nine doses (FBT = 6, placebo = 3) in a randomized sequence.

SETTING

Twenty-one study centers in the United States.

POPULATION

Opioid-tolerant adults with noncancer-related chronic pain and BTP.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the sum of the pain intensity differences (PID) 5-60 minutes post dose (SPID₆₀) during the final double-blind period. Secondary outcomes included pain relief (PR), meaningful PR, and proportion of episodes with a PID of ≥33% and ≥50%.

RESULTS

Of 148 patients who entered the titration phase, 105 (71%) achieved a successful dose and 81 (55%) participated in all three assessment periods in the study. The final RCT assessment period results demonstrated continued efficacy of FBT vs placebo (P < 0.05) for SPID₆₀ (mean [SD]: 7.7 [6.2] vs 4.6 [4.7]). The average onset of PR began at 5 minutes, with meaningful PR by ≤10 minutes. The proportion of episodes with ≥33% improvement in PI was 7% with FBT vs 3% with placebo at 5 minutes and with ≥50% was 17% vs 10% at 15 minutes. All periods showed similar results. Adverse events and patient discontinuations were generally typical of clinical opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

FBT showed continued clinically important analgesic effects and was generally well tolerated over 12 weeks of treatment.

Dose proportionality of fentanyl buccal tablet in doses ranging from 600 to 1300 microg in healthy adult subjects: a randomized, open-label, four-period, crossover, single-centre study

Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT) is indicated for the treatment of breakthrough pain in patients who are already receiving, and who are tolerant to, opioid therapy for underlying, persistent cancer pain. Breakthrough pain may be severe or excruciating, and some patients may require high doses of rapid-onset opioids to obtain adequate analgesia. The objective of this study was to assess the dose proportionality of FBT over a range of 600-1300 microg in healthy subjects. This was a randomized, open-label, four-period, crossover, single-centre study of FBT (Fentora) conducted in healthy adult subjects who were not tolerant to opioids. The study included 120 men and women aged 18-45 years with a body mass index of 20-30 kg/m2 who had no clinically significant findings on medical and psychiatric histories, physical examination, ECG or standard clinical laboratory tests, and who had a negative urine screen for drugs and alcohol. Eligible subjects were randomized to one of four dose sequences: ABDC, BCAD, CDBA and DACB, where A, B, C and D were FBT doses from lowest to highest (600, 1000, 1200 and 1300 microg). Each dose of FBT was separated by a minimum of 7 days. Naltrexone 50 mg was administered to block the opioid receptor-mediated effects of fentanyl. Plasma fentanyl concentration was measured through 72 hours after placement of FBT. The main outcome measures, maximum plasma fentanyl concentration (C(max)) and area under the plasma drug concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(infinity)), were analysed to determine dose proportionality. Other pharmacokinetic parameters were also evaluated. Dose proportionality was concluded if the two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the slopes of the C(max) versus dose and AUC(infinity) versus dose curves were completely contained within the range of 0.711-1.289. The safety and tolerability of FBT were assessed throughout the study. The slope for C(max) versus dose was 0.8627 (90% CI 0.7730, 0.9525), and the slope for AUC(infinity) versus dose was 0.9330 (90% CI 0.8738, 0.9922). Given that the CIs for C(max) and AUC(infinity) were within the predefined range of 0.711-1.289, dose proportionality was concluded over the 600-1300 microg range. The mean dose-normalized plasma fentanyl concentration reached 80% of C(max) within 25 minutes; plasma fentanyl concentration was maintained at this level for 3 hours after dose. No unexpected safety or tolerability concerns were noted in the naltrexone-blocked healthy subjects. Seventy-four subjects (68%) experienced adverse events (AEs); all were mild (56 [51%]) or moderate (18 [17%]). The most common AEs were nausea, dizziness and headache. No serious AEs were reported. The dose proportionality of FBT from 600-1300 microg was shown in healthy subjects. Based on the data, when FBT is titrated up to 1300 microg, a predictable and linear increase in systemic exposure can be expected. Currently, FBT is approved up to 800 microg. This study provides pharmacokinetic data to support a potential, expanded therapeutic dose range of FBT.

Fentanyl buccal tablet for the treatment of breakthrough pain: pharmacokinetics of buccal mucosa delivery and clinical efficacy

The treatment of breakthrough pain (BTP), a transitory exacerbation of pain that occurs on a background of otherwise-controlled, persistent pain, requires an opioid formulation and/or method of administration that can provide rapid and extensive systemic exposure. Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT; FENTORA^®, Cephalon, Inc.) employs OraVescent^® drug delivery technology, which enhances the rate and extent of fentanyl absorption. OraVescent technology enhances the oral dissolution and buccal absorption of fentanyl, which facilitates rapid uptake of fentanyl into the bloodstream, reducing gastrointestinal absorption and minimizing extensive first-pass metabolism. The resulting pharmacokinetic profile of FBT is characterized by greater bioavailability and a higher early systemic exposure compared with the earlier oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate formulation. In clinical studies of opioid-tolerant patients with cancer-related and noncancer-related BTP, FBT has provided consistent and clinically relevant improvements in pain intensity and pain relief relative to placebo, with a safety and tolerability profile that is generally typical of that observed with other potent opioids. The pharmacokinetic properties of FBT allow for meaningful clinical efficacy, with an onset of action that closely matches the onset of BTP.

Prevalence and characteristics of breakthrough pain in patients with head and neck cancer: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Approximately one half to two thirds of patients with cancer-related pain experience breakthrough pain (BTP) in their daily activities.

OBJECTIVE

This is the first report to determine the prevalence and characteristics of BTP experienced by patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS

This was a prospective cross-sectional study conducted in patients with head and neck cancer on stable doses of opioid (morphine) for at least 1 week. This study was designed as a cross-sectional study using a series of breakthrough pain questionnaires (BPQ).

RESULTS

Prevalence of BTP in our study was 48% (average of 3.85 episodes per day) of which more than 50% of episodes were of gradual onset but with severe intensity. Incident pain was predominate (50%) followed by spontaneous (25%) and end of dose failure (20%) and in 5% the nature of pain was unknown or mixed. Unlike other studies the onset of BTP in this present study with head and neck cancer was more gradual and lasted longer than 30 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with head and neck cancer do suffer a lot because of the high incidence of BTP (48%). The majority of patients suffering from BTP are not satisfied at all with the measures taken for their BTP. The majority of patients in India have head and neck cancer; we must approach this matter as a challenge and new technique and therapy should be introduced for the benefit of these patients.

Formulations of fentanyl for the management of pain

Fentanyl is an opioid initially developed for parenteral administration. While oral administration is not an option due to a high first-pass metabolism, its high potency and lipophilicity have made a number of new routes of administration feasible. The transdermal therapeutic system offers an excellent option for long-term treatment of cancer and chronic pain, achieving stable plasma concentrations over the treatment period. The recent change from reservoir to matrix systems has made these systems more convenient to wear and safer to use, while being bioequivalent. In contrast, the patient-controlled iontophoretic transdermal system has been developed to enable on-demand delivery of transdermal bolus doses of fentanyl to treat postoperative pain. It offers a needle-free system to provide patient-controlled analgesia otherwise offered by intravenous pumps. However, due to technical difficulties the system is currently not clinically available. Oral transmucosal fentanyl utilizes the rapid uptake through the buccal mucosa to achieve high plasma concentrations rapidly and is indicated to treat breakthrough pain in patients who are not opioid-naive. The recently introduced fentanyl buccal tablets offer slightly better pharmacokinetics for the same indication. The intranasal route is another option to achieve rapid uptake of fentanyl, and is currently being investigated to provide acute and breakthrough pain relief. Transpulmonary administration of fentanyl remains experimental and this route of administration is not yet in clinical use. Overall, the specific pharmacological and physicochemical properties of fentanyl have made this compound highly suitable for novel routes of administration in a range of clinical indications.