Dataset Information

Intravenous Oxycodone versus Intravenous Morphine in Cancer Pain: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Active-Control Study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of intravenous continuous infusion of oxycodone with morphine in patients with cancer pain.

Methods

A 5-day, randomized, open-label, exploratory study at 6 sites in the Republic of Korea. Sixty-six adults aged ≥19 years with moderate-to-severe cancer pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] ≥ 4) were enrolled. The study group received intravenous (IV) oxycodone, and the comparator group received IV morphine which were titrated depending on pain intensity. The efficacy endpoint is change in average NRS score from baseline to Day 5. Other assessments included worst, current, and average pain intensity; patient satisfaction; medication dose; and adverse events.

Results

Both groups achieved >50% reduction in average pain intensity: from "moderate" at baseline (oxycodone versus morphine: 6.0 ± 1.8 versus 5.9 ± 1.4) to "mild" at Day 5 (2.5 ± 1.8 versus 2.8 ± 1.6). While this reduction was similar between groups (3.5 ± 2.2 versus 3.1 ± 1.8, P value = 0.562), oxycodone achieved faster pain relief (average pain: 3.0 ± 1.6 versus 3.9 ± 1.6, P value = 0.020) on Day 2 and significant NRS reductions for worst pain on Day 2 (P value = 0.045) and current pain on Day 2 (P value = 0.035) and Day 5 (P value = 0.020) compared to morphine. Patient satisfaction, adverse events, and adverse drug reactions were similar for both groups.

Conclusions

For Asian patients with cancer pain, IV oxycodone is faster acting and showed similar analgesic efficacy and safety profiles as IV morphine. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02660229.

SUBMITTER: Lee KH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5833922 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intravenous Oxycodone versus Intravenous Morphine in Cancer Pain: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Active-Control Study.

Lee Kyung-Hee KH Kang Jung-Hun JH Oh Ho-Suk HS Choi Moon-Ki MK Shim Byoung-Yong BY Eum Young-Jun YJ Park Hye-Jeong HJ Kang Jin-Hyong JH

Pain research & management 20171031

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare efficacy and safety of intravenous continuous infusion of oxycodone with morphine in patients with cancer pain.<h4>Methods</h4>A 5-day, randomized, open-label, exploratory study at 6 sites in the Republic of Korea. Sixty-six adults aged ≥19 years with moderate-to-severe cancer pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] ≥ 4) were enrolled. The study group received intravenous (IV) oxycodone, and the comparator group received IV morphine which were titrated depending on pain int ...[more]

PMID: 29670416

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose:Opioid analgesics remain the cornerstone of treatment for severe trauma pain in the emergency setting, but there are barriers to their use. This post hoc analysis of a previously reported trial (MEDITA) investigated the efficacy and safety of low-dose methoxyflurane versus intravenous (IV) morphine for severe trauma pain. Patients and Methods:MEDITA was a Phase IIIb, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label study in Italian pre-hospital units and emergency departments (EudraCT: 2017-001565-25; NCT03585374). Adult patients (N=272) with moderate-to-severe trauma pain (score ?4 on the Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]) were randomized 1:1 to inhaled methoxyflurane (3 mL) or standard analgesic treatment (SAT; IV paracetamol 1g or ketoprofen 100mg for moderate pain [NRS 4-6] and IV morphine 0.1mg/kg for severe pain [NRS ?7]). Analyses were performed for the severe pain subgroup. The primary efficacy variable was the overall change from baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) pain intensity at 3, 5 and 10min post-randomization. Non-inferiority of methoxyflurane versus morphine was concluded if the upper 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference was <1; superiority was concluded if the upper 95% CI was <0. Results:Ninety-three patients (methoxyflurane: 49; SAT: 44) were included in the severe pain intention-to-treat population. The reduction in VAS pain intensity over the first 10min was superior for methoxyflurane versus morphine (adjusted mean treatment difference: -5.54mm; 95% CI: -10.49, -0.59mm; p=0.029). Median time to onset of pain relief was 9min for methoxyflurane and 15min for morphine. Patients rated treatment efficacy and physicians rated treatment practicality "Excellent" or "Very good" for more methoxyflurane-treated patients (42.8% and 67.3%) than morphine-treated patients (18.1% and 22.8%). Adverse events, all non-serious, were reported in 20.4% of methoxyflurane-treated patients and in 4.8% of morphine-treated patients. Conclusion:Methoxyflurane provided superior short-term pain relief to IV morphine in patients with severe trauma pain and offers an effective non-narcotic treatment option.

Project description:IntroductionOptimal pain management is crucial to the postoperative recovery process. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous oxycodone with intravenous fentanyl, morphine, sufentanil, pethidine, and hydromorphone for acute postoperative pain.MethodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases was performed for randomized controlled trials published from 2008 through 2017 (inclusive) that evaluated the acute postoperative analgesic efficacy of intravenous oxycodone against fentanyl, morphine, sufentanil, pethidine, and hydromorphone in adult patients (age ≥ 18 years). Outcomes examined included analgesic consumption, pain intensity levels, side effects, and patient satisfaction.ResultsEleven studies were included in the review; six compared oxycodone with fentanyl, two compared oxycodone with morphine, and three compared oxycodone with sufentanil. There were no eligible studies comparing oxycodone with pethidine or hydromorphone. Overall, analgesic consumption was lower with oxycodone than with fentanyl or sufentanil. Oxycodone exhibited better analgesic efficacy than fentanyl and sufentanil, and comparable analgesic efficacy to morphine. In terms of safety, there was a tendency towards more side effects with oxycodone than with fentanyl, but the incidence of side effects with oxycodone was comparable to morphine and sufentanil. Where patient satisfaction was evaluated, higher satisfaction levels were observed with oxycodone than with sufentanil and comparable satisfaction was noted when comparing oxycodone with fentanyl. Patient satisfaction was not evaluated in the studies comparing oxycodone with morphine.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that intravenous oxycodone provides better analgesic efficacy than fentanyl and sufentanil, and comparable efficacy to morphine with less adverse events such as sedation. No studies comparing intravenous oxycodone with pethidine or hydromorphone were identified in this review. Better alignment of study methodologies for future research in this area is recommended to provide the best evidence base for a meta-analysis.FundingMundipharma Singapore Holding Pte Ltd, Singapore.

Project description:BackgroundIntercostal nerve damage due to thoracotomy or thoracoscopic manipulation is a major contributor to chronic postsurgical pain after pulmonary resection. Chronic postsurgical pain may last for months or years and can negatively impair physical functioning and daily activities. Global consensus on severe postoperative pain management is lacking, and chronic pain incidence after thoracic surgery remains high. Many patients report neuropathic pain, which can be difficult to treat with currently available therapies. The efficacy and safety of mirogabalin have been demonstrated for other types of neuropathic pain; thus, this study was planned to investigate the efficacy and safety of mirogabalin to treat neuropathic pain after thoracic surgery.MethodsIn this multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, interventional study, patients who are diagnosed with neuropathic pain following removal of a chest drain after lung resection will receive conventional therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or acetaminophen) with or without the addition of a clinical dose of mirogabalin for 8 weeks. For patient stratification, a visual analog scale pain intensity score at baseline of <60 vs. ≥60 mm will be used. Treatment efficacy and safety with and without the addition of mirogabalin will be assessed using a questionnaire evaluating postoperative changes in pain severity and activity. The primary study endpoint is the change in pain intensity from baseline to Week 8, measured by the visual analog scale. Additionally, the presence of chronic pain at 12 weeks after enrollment in each treatment group will be recorded.DiscussionThis protocol has been reviewed and approved by the Clinical Research Review Board of Nagasaki University. Study data will be published in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials database and peer-reviewed journals. Mirogabalin is already approved for the treatment of other types of neuropathic pain. It is anticipated that this study will provide data to elucidate the impact of mirogabalin treatment, in combination with conventional therapy, to benefit patients with neuropathic pain following thoracic surgery.Trial registrationJapan Registry of Clinical Trials Identifier: jRCTs071200053.

Dataset Information

Intravenous Oxycodone versus Intravenous Morphine in Cancer Pain: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Active-Control Study.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Intravenous Oxycodone versus Intravenous Morphine in Cancer Pain: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Active-Control Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets