Dataset Information

Use of immediate-release opioids as supplemental analgesia during management of moderate-to-severe chronic pain with buprenorphine transdermal system.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) is approved in the US for the management of chronic pain. Due to its high affinity for ?-opioid receptors with a slow dissociation profile, buprenorphine may potentially displace or prevent the binding of competing ?-opioid-receptor agonists, including immediate-release (IR) opioids, in a dose-dependent manner. Health care professionals may assume that the use of IR opioids for supplemental analgesia during BTDS therapy is not acceptable. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This post hoc analysis evaluated the use of IR opioids as supplemental analgesia during the management of moderate-severe chronic pain with BTDS at 52 US sites (BUP3015S, NCT01125917). Patients were categorized into IR-opioid and no-IR-opioid groups. At each visit of the extension phase, adverse events, concomitant medications, and information from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) were recorded. RESULTS:The most common supplemental IR opioids prescribed during BTDS treatment (n=354) were hydrocodone-acetaminophen and oxycodone-acetaminophen. The mean daily dose of IR opioids (morphine equivalents) for supplemental analgesia was 22 mg. At baseline, BPI - pain intensity and BPI - interference scores were higher for patients in the IR-opioid group. In both treatment groups, scores improved by week 4, and then were maintained throughout 6 months of the open-label extension trial. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION:Patients who were prescribed IR opioids reported lower scores for BPI pain intensity and pain interference to levels similar to patients receiving BTDS without IR opioids, without increasing the rate or severity of treatment-emergent adverse events. Patients prescribed concomitant use of IR opioids with BTDS had greater treatment persistence. The results of this post hoc analysis provide support for the concomitant use of IR opioids for supplemental analgesia during the management of moderate-severe chronic pain with BTDS.

SUBMITTER: Silverman S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5449099 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of immediate-release opioids as supplemental analgesia during management of moderate-to-severe chronic pain with buprenorphine transdermal system.

Silverman Sanford S Raffa Robert B RB Cataldo Marc J MJ Kwarcinski Monica M Ripa Steven R SR

Journal of pain research 20170524

<h4>Background</h4>The buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) is approved in the US for the management of chronic pain. Due to its high affinity for μ-opioid receptors with a slow dissociation profile, buprenorphine may potentially displace or prevent the binding of competing μ-opioid-receptor agonists, including immediate-release (IR) opioids, in a dose-dependent manner. Health care professionals may assume that the use of IR opioids for supplemental analgesia during BTDS therapy is not accept ...[more]

PMID: 28579823

Similar Datasets

Project description:We examined the effectiveness and tolerability of transdermal buprenorphine (TDB) treatment in real-world setting in Asian patients with musculoskeletal pain.This was an open-label study conducted in Hong Kong, Korea, and the Philippines between June 2013 and April 2015. Eligible patients fulfilled the following criteria: 18 to 80 years of age; clinical diagnosis of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, low back pain, or joint/muscle pain; chronic non-malignant pain of moderate to severe intensity (Box-Scale-11 [BS-11] pain score ? 4), not adequately controlled with non-opioid analgesics and requiring an opioid for adequate analgesia; and no prior history of opioid treatment. Patients started with a 5 ?g/h buprenorphine patch and were titrated as necessary to a maximum of 40 ?g/h over a 6-week period to achieve optimal pain control. Patients continued treatment with the titrated dose for 11 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in BS-11 pain scores. Other endpoints included patients' sleep quality and quality of life as assessed by the 8-item Global Sleep Quality Assessment Scale (GSQA) questionnaire and the EuroQol Group 5-Dimension Self-Report Questionnaire-3 Level version (EQ-5D-3 L), respectively. Tolerability was assessed by collecting adverse events.A total of 114 eligible patients were included in the analysis. The mean BS-11 score at baseline was 6.2 (SD 1.6). Following initiation of TDB, there was a statistically significant improvement in BS-11 score from baseline to visit 3 (least squares [LS] mean change: -2.27 [95% CI -2.66 to -1.87]), which was maintained till the end of the study (visit 7) (LS mean change: -2.64 [95% -3.05 to -2.23]) (p < 0.0001 for both). The proportion of patients who rated sleep quality as 'good' increased from 14.0% at baseline to 26.9% at visit 6. By visit 6, the mean EQ VAS score increased by 7.7 units (SD 17.9). There were also significant improvements in patients' levels of functioning for all EQ-5D-3 L dimensions from baseline at visit 6 (p < 0.05 for all). Seventy-eight percent of patients reported TEAEs and 22.8% of patients discontinued due to TEAEs. TEAEs were generally mild to moderate in intensity (96.5%).TDB provides effective pain relief with an acceptable tolerability profile over the 11-week treatment period in Asian patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. More studies are needed to examine the long-term efficacy and safety of TBD treatment in this patient population.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01961271 . Registered 7 October 2013 (retrospectively registered; first patient was enrolled on 28 June 2013 and last patient last visit date was 26 Apr 2015).

Project description:Background and objectivesThe effectiveness and tolerability of tapentadol extended release (ER), a centrally acting analgesic with μ-opioid receptor agonist and norepinephrine (noradrenaline) reuptake inhibitor activities, have been demonstrated in patients with chronic pain, including those switching directly from prior opioid therapy. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of conversion to oral tapentadol ER (50-250 mg twice daily) from previous around-the-clock strong opioid therapy in patients with moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumor-related cancer pain that was well-controlled.MethodsThis randomized, open-label, phase III study, which was conducted in Japan, included a 1- to 2-week screening period (on previous opioid) and an 8-week, open-label treatment period. Eligible patients, who were taking a strong opioid analgesic and had a mean pain intensity score <4 during the 3 days prior to randomization (adequate pain control on previous strong opioid), were randomized (1:1) to receive twice-daily treatment with tapentadol ER (100-500 mg/day) or morphine sustained release (SR; 20-140 mg/day; reference for assay sensitivity). Initial doses were estimated based on the conversion ratio of tapentadol ER:oxycodone:morphine:fentanyl = 10:2:3:0.03. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the proportion of patients who maintained pain control [change from baseline in mean pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) less than +1.5 for 3 consecutive days and no more than two doses of rescue medication per day for 3 consecutive days) during the first week of open-label treatment.ResultsIn the tapentadol ER group (n = 50), 84.0 % of patients (42/50; 95 % CI, 70.89-92.83) maintained pain control during Week 1. On the Patient Global Impression of Change, 2.1 % (1/48), 2.1 % (1/48), 22.9 % (11/48), and 50.0 % (24/48) of patients in the tapentadol ER group reported that their overall condition was "very much improved," "much improved," "minimally improved," and "not changed," respectively, at Week 1 compared with 0 %, 10.7 % (3/28), 28.6 % (8/28), and 53.6 % (15/28) reporting these ratings at Week 8. The sensitivity of effectiveness analyses was validated based on results using morphine SR; 98.0 % (49/50; 95 % CI, 89.35-99.95) of patients in the morphine SR group maintained pain control after 1 week of treatment. The overall safety profile was similar to that demonstrated in previous studies; tapentadol ER was associated with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse events than morphine SR [38.0 % (19/50) vs. 54.0 % (27/50)], including constipation [12.0 % (6/50) vs. 20.0 % (10/50)] and vomiting [6.0 % (3/50) vs. 26.0 % (13/50)].ConclusionsOverall, results indicate that conversion from previous strong opioids to tapentadol ER (50-250 mg twice daily) was successful and resulted in safe and effective pain control with improved gastrointestinal tolerability versus morphine SR in patients with moderate to severe cancer-related pain that was well-controlled on their previous opioid.

Project description:IntroductionPain management in patients with hip fractures can be challenging. Poor pain control is associated with reduced mobility and increased morbidity. Inadequate analgesia in patients with dementia is a concern. After using several different alternatives, transdermal buprenorphine was chosen as a standardised approach for analgesia in patients with fragility fracture in our hospital. There is limited evidence on the use of buprenorphine in this population. Our aim was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of transdermal buprenorphine in patients with hip fractures.MethodsA review of consecutive patients presenting with a hip fracture from June 2018 to December 2018 was conducted using medical records. Our primary outcome was the incidence of complications as a consequence of transdermal buprenorphine. Our secondary outcome was adequate analgesia measured by reviewing the requirement for analgesia during the first week following the patient's admission. Analgesia demands were considered adequate if patients required less than 20 mg of oral morphine in total during the first week following injury.ResultsIn total, 148 patients presented with a hip fracture during the study period. 128 patients had documented evidence of buprenorphine patch application. Complete data was available for the primary outcome of complications in all cases. Data was available for the secondary outcome in 124 patients. Buprenorphine was discontinued in 24 patients (19%), most commonly due to due to concerns about contribution to hypoactive delirium (9%), and when strong analgesia was no longer required (4%). There were no severe complications. Adequate analgesia was achieved using this regime in 68% patients. 38 patients (32%) required more than 20 mg of oral morphine sulphate solution in the first week post-admission.ConclusionThis series suggests that transdermal buprenorphine is safe and effective in the management of pain following a neck of femur fragility fracture.

Project description:IntroductionRheumatoid arthritis (RA) produces debilitating morning stiffness. Exogenous glucocorticoids can help with these symptoms when timed appropriately. Bedtime dosing of delayed-release prednisone (DR-prednisone) matches the rise of inflammatory cytokines before awakening and can improve stiffness and other RA symptoms. A prospective open-label study was conducted in patients currently on stable doses of immediate-release prednisone (IR-prednisone) who were switched to DR-prednisone to analyze the incremental benefit of better timed and lower dose glucocorticoid therapy.MethodsTwelve US sites enrolled patients with moderate-severe RA into a 12-week prospective study. Patients were switched from IR- to DR-prednisone while maintaining other existing background therapies. Change from baseline in morning stiffness severity, morning stiffness duration, swollen and tender joint counts (S-TJC), 28 joint disease activity score (DAS28), and patient/physician global assessment (PGA/PhGA), among others, were measured. Post-hoc analyses were performed on those completing 10 weeks of treatment and those with >60 min of morning stiffness at baseline.ResultsFifty-six patients had at least one follow-up visit and were similar in demographics to previous controlled trials with DR-prednisone with regard to baseline age and DAS28-CRP but had lower morning stiffness and RA duration. DR-prednisone produced a trend toward lower morning stiffness severity and duration with a reduction in daily prednisone dose of almost 1 mg. Patients treated with DR-prednisone for ≥10 weeks demonstrated significant reductions in morning stiffness duration, SJC, TJC, DAS28-CRP, and PhGA (all p ≤ 0.04). Patients treated for ≥10 weeks with >60 min of baseline morning stiffness produced similar results in these measures as well as a 21% reduction in morning stiffness severity (p = 0.02).ConclusionPatients switched to DR-prednisone from IR-prednisone in this practice-based study maintained or improved their outcomes across a variety of domains, and results were comparable to previous controlled trials in which patients completed at least 10 weeks of treatment.FundingHorizon Pharma USA, Inc.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02287610.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of tapentadol immediate release (IR) and oxycodone IR for relief of moderate to severe pain in elderly and nonelderly patients. METHODS:Post hoc data analyses were conducted on a 90-day randomized, phase 3, double-blind, flexible-dose study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00364546) of adults with moderate to severe lower back pain or osteoarthritis pain who received tapentadol IR 50 mg or 100 mg, or oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg or 15 mg every 4 h to 6 h as needed for pain relief. Treatment-emergent adverse events and study discontinuations were recorded. RESULTS:Data from 849 patients randomly assigned (4:1 ratio) to treatment with a study drug (tapentadol IR [n=679] or oxycodone IR [n=170]) were analyzed according to age (younger than 65 years of age [nonelderly], or 65 years of age or older [elderly]) and treatment group. Among elderly patients, incidences of constipation (19.0% versus 35.6%) and nausea or vomiting (30.4% versus 51.1%) were significantly lower with tapentadol IR versus oxycodone IR (all P<0.05). Initial onsets of nausea and constipation occurred significantly later with tapentadol IR versus oxycodone IR (both P<=0.031). Tapentadol IR-treated elderly patients had a lower percentage of days with constipation than oxycodone IR-treated patients (P=0.020). For tapentadol IR- and oxycodone IR-treated elderly patients, respectively, incidences of study discontinuation due to gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse events were 15.8% and 24.4% (P=0.190). Tapentadol IR and oxycodone IR provided similar pain relief, with no overall age-dependent efficacy differences (mean pain scores [11-point numerical rating scale] decreased from 7.0 and 7.2 at baseline, to 4.9 and 5.2 at end point, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Tapentadol IR was safe and effective for the relief of lower back pain and osteoarthritis pain in elderly patients, and was associated with a better gastrointestinal tolerability profile than oxycodone IR.

Project description:IntroductionNausea and vomiting (NV) are common side effects of opioid use and limiting factors in pain management. This study sought to quantify the frequency of antiemetic prescribing and the impact of NV on health care resource utilization and costs in outpatients prescribed opioids for acute pain. The perspective was that of a commercial health plan.MethodsMedical and pharmacy claims from IMS PharMetrics Plus were used to identify patients initiating opioid therapy with a prescription for an oxycodone-, hydrocodone- or codeine-containing immediate-release product for acute use (≤15-day supply) between October 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014. Patients with a medical claim for NV (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes 787.0x), with or without an antiemetic prescription fill, were compared with patients with no NV claim or antiemetic prescription fill to assess differences in all-cause health care utilization and costs over 1 month. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for between-group differences in baseline patient characteristics.ResultsThe co-prescribing of opioids with antiemetic agents was 10.2%. After PSM (n = 45,790 per group), patients with NV claims had significantly more hospitalizations (11.5% vs 4.2%), emergency department visits (65.0% vs 12.1%), and physician office visits (85.2% vs 64.5%) compared with patients with no NV claims (all P < 0.0001). Mean total health care costs were higher among patients with a NV claim versus those without evidence of the side effect ($6290 vs $2309; P < 0.0001). Among patients with a recent hospitalization, patients with NV claims had higher rates of 30-day rehospitalization than those with no NV claims (24.4% vs 3.0%; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsAmong outpatients prescribed opioids for management of acute pain, co-prescribing with antiemetics was low, and the economic burden associated with NV was high. Efforts to prevent NV in patients receiving opioid therapy may improve patient outcomes and provide cost savings to the health care system.FundingDaiichi Sankyo, Inc.

Dataset Information

Use of immediate-release opioids as supplemental analgesia during management of moderate-to-severe chronic pain with buprenorphine transdermal system.

Publications

Use of immediate-release opioids as supplemental analgesia during management of moderate-to-severe chronic pain with buprenorphine transdermal system.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure