Highlights in opioid agonists and antagonists

The clinical and laboratorial evaluation of transdermal ketamine, fentanyl, clonidine or their combination in chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVES: chronic low back pain may result in central sensitization, with involvement of different receptors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic action of transdermal (T) ketamine (a NMDA antagonist), clonidine (an α2-agonist), fentanyl (an opioid agonist), or their combination in chronic low back pain. METHODS: after the institutional approval and informed consent signature, 54 patients were prospectively randomized into 6 groups. Each patient had two of the T preparations applied in different arms. The effect of either T ketamine (1 mg/h), T clonidine (25 µg/h) or T fentanyl (25 µg/h), combined with T placebo (CloG, KetG and FenG); or the combination of T ketamine and clonidine (Ket-CloG), T fentanyl and ketamine (Fen-KetG), or T fentanyl and clonidine (Fen-CloG) was searched for pain and adverse effects. Pain was evaluated by: 1) VAS pain scores, and 2) noradrenaline plasma levels at 0-h (just prior to T application), 3- and 6-h after the T application of two medications, by HPLC. RESULTS: clinically, the pain VAS score at 6-h was smaller in comparison to the 0-h in all groups (p<0.02), and lower when compared to the Fen-CloG and Fen-KetG at the 6-h in relation to the administration of each correspondent T drug alone (p<0.05). The laboratorial data revealed that administration of T fentanyl alone (FenG) resulted in plasma noradrenaline decrease at 6-h (p<0.01), while the association of T fentanyl with clonidine resulted in plasma noradrenaline decrease at 3- and 6-h as compared to the others (p<0.01). The combination of both T ketamine and clonidine (Ket-CloG) did not result in a better analgesic profile and resulted in excessive sedation during the evaluation (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: all the studied drugs resulted in clinical analgesia (VAS) at 6-h. However, T fentanyl analgesia was corroborated by lower plasma noradrenaline levels at 6-h when applied alone or at 3-h when combined with T clonidine.

Current developments in opioid therapy for management of cancer pain

Pain remains a highly prevalent problem for patients with cancer and typically falls into one of 3 types: visceral, somatic, and neuropathic. A mechanistic, pathophysiologic approach to pain management involves a good assessment of the type of pain, followed by tailoring of the treatment based on the diagnosis. This pain management strategy can provide rapid pain control with a lower incidence of complications and side effects than other methods. Furthermore, pharmacogenetics may play an important role in individualizing therapies in the future, but for now this type of data offers explanations for phenomena commonly observed in clinical practice, such as (1) differences in individual analgesic and side-effect responses to various opioid agents, (2) incomplete cross-tolerance seen when switching between mu opioid analgesics, and (3) why opioid rotation can be beneficial for patients after an opioid therapy loses efficacy or becomes associated with intolerable side effects. Especially for difficult-to-manage pain patients, additions to the opioid analgesic armamentarium can potentially better individualize pain management, and provide another option to be used for opioid rotation. Among the most recent Food and Drug Administration-approved opioid analgesics for acute pain and persistent pain are oral immediate-release and extended-release formulations of oxymorphone, whereas for breakthrough pain, the ultrarapid-acting opioid, fentanyl effervescent buccal tablets, has newly been developed and indicated within the United States.