This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of pregabalin-a novel alpha(2)-delta ligand with analgesic, anxiolytic, and anticonvulsant activity-for treating neuropathic pain in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN). Two hundred and thirty-eight patients were randomised into this multicentre, doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial to receive 150 (n=81), 300 mg/day (n=76) pregabalin, or placebo (n=81) for 8 weeks. Among the exclusion criteria was failure to respond to previous treatment for PHN with gabapentin at doses > or =1200 mg/day. Endpoint mean pain scores were significantly reduced in patients receiving 150 or 300 mg/day pregabalin compared with placebo. Efficacy was observed as early as week 1 and was maintained throughout the study. Significantly more patients in both pregabalin groups (150 mg, 26%; 300 mg, 28%) were responders (> or =50% decrease in mean pain score from baseline to endpoint) than in the placebo group (10%). Additionally, by week 1 and for the study's duration, 150 and 300 mg/day pregabalin significantly reduced weekly mean sleep interference scores. More pregabalin-treated patients than placebo-treated patients reported that they were 'much improved' or 'very much improved'. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) measurements using the SF-36 Health Survey demonstrated improvement in the mental health domain for both pregabalin dosages, and bodily pain and vitality domains were improved in the 300 mg/day group. The most frequent adverse events were dizziness, somnolence, peripheral oedema, headache, and dry mouth. Pregabalin efficaciously treated the neuropathic pain of PHN. Additionally, pregabalin was associated with decreased sleep interference and significant improvements in HRQoL measures.
Eighteen patients suffering from cancer were entered into a study of the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of methadone and morphine in pain control. All patients had both clinical and radiological evidence of metastatic spread of their cancer and there were no significant differences in age, weight and sites of the primary cancer between the methadone (n = 9) and morphine (n = 9) groups. Blood opioid concentration, visual analogue pain scores (VAPS) and end-tidal percent carbon dioxide were measured before and after both an intravenous and oral dose of either methadone or morphine. Terminal half-lives (mean +/- S.D.) were 30.4 +/- 16.3 h and 2.7 +/- 1.2 h respectively for methadone and morphine while the clearance values (mean +/- S.D.) were 0.19 +/- 0.13 l/min and 1.16 +/- 0.47 l/min. The long half-life of methadone was associated with prolonged pain relief. However, the large variation in the half-life of methadone necessitated careful adjustment of the dosing interval in individual patients. There were pronounced differences in oral bioavailability between the two opioids: methadone, 79 +/- 11.7%, compared to morphine, 26 +/- 13% (mean +/- S.D.). Of greater clinical significance was the variability in these bioavailability estimates with a coefficient of variation of 15% for methadone compared to 50% for morphine. The combined effects of low and variable oral bioavailability for morphine may result in sub-therapeutic doses being administered as practitioners may be inhibited by the size of the effective oral morphine dose and may be confused by the variability in this dose compared to intramuscular doses. The initial oral dose of morphine varied from 15 mg 4 hourly to 150 mg 3 hourly, while the initial dose for methadone varied from 15 mg on alternate nights to 20 mg twice daily. There was no rapid escalation of daily opioid dose for either methadone or morphine when adequate pain control was provided rapidly at the start of treatment by the technique described in this study.
The long half-life and wide inter-patient variability in clearance of methadone make this drug difficult to use optimally. If a patient's methadone clearance is known, however, dose regimens can be devised to maintain any desired blood concentration and hence, since the effect of methadone is related to its concentration in the blood, pain relief. We investigated methods for determining methadone clearance. In 25 patients, clearance was estimated by monitoring blood methadone concentrations following an intravenous infusion. Estimates of clearance adequate for clinical purposes could be obtained by assaying only 10-12 blood samples collected over 30 h following the infusion. The blood sampling schedules were such that it was not necessary to collect samples during the night, so the procedure could be done on an outpatient basis. An advantage of this procedure is that it also allows estimation of the blood methadone concentration required to relieve pain. We also conducted a retrospective study of data from 185 patients whose methadone clearance we had determined, to identify factors which may give rise to the large inter-patient variation in clearance. Clearance tended to be high in patients taking phenytoin, spironolactone, verapamil or oestrogens, and low in patients taking amitriptyline. Patients with malignant disease as opposed to chronic benign pain, and patients 65 years of age or older, tended to have low clearance. Clearance was positively associated with haematocrit. An equation was constructed allowing methadone clearance to be predicted from knowledge of these factors. The predicted clearance, however, showed only a moderately strong correlation with measured clearance (r = 0.75), indicating that factors not investigated also had a major influence on methadone clearance.
Fentanyl (1 microgram/kg body weight) was administered intravenously and via a lumbar epidural catheter (in random order) on 2 separate occasions to 6 patients with chronic pain associated with non-terminal disease states. Frequent blood samples were collected from an indwelling intravenous catheter and CSF samples were collected via spinal needles inserted in the cervical (C7-T1 interspace) and lumbar (L3.4 interspace) regions at 0, 5, 10, 20, 30 and 45 min after fentanyl administration. The concentration of fentanyl in blood and CSF samples were quantified by a sensitive and selective gas-liquid chromatography assay. Visual analogue pain scores (VAPS) were recorded every 5 min for the first hour. Coded syringes (one containing the appropriate fentanyl dose while the other contained an equivalent volume of saline) allowed the investigator administering the fentanyl and assessing VAPS to remain blinded as to which route of administration actually contained the fentanyl. There was minimal vascular uptake of fentanyl following epidural administration. Similarly, the permeation of fentanyl into cervical and lumbar CSF following intravenous administration was minimal and erratic such that only 4 of the 60 CSF samples had detectable fentanyl concentrations. In contrast, there was a rapid penetration of fentanyl across the dura mater following lumbar epidural administration. There was significantly fentanyl in lumbar CSF samples by 10 min in 5 patients, and by 20 min in all 6 patients. The mean maximum lumbar CSF concentration was 19.1 ng/ml, while the time associated with these maximum concentrations was 22.5 min. The mean maximum cervical CSF fentanyl concentrations were 10% of the lumbar CSF concentrations.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Twenty-eight patients with severe pain due to cancer, who could no longer obtain acceptable pain relief from optimised doses of oral opioids, were entered into a study which compared pain relief, satisfaction with pain therapy and estimates of neuropsychological functioning during treatment with spinally administered (i.e., epidural and intrathecal) morphine as either repeated bolus doses or as a continuous infusion. These measures of efficacy and side effects were repeated every 2 weeks until either the patient died (82% of patients), withdrew from the study or were no longer able to complete the tests due to deterioration of their condition. The mean (range) duration of treatment was 169 (6-537) days for those patients receiving continuous infusion and 140 (28-378) days for those patients receiving repeated bolus doses. There was no significant difference in visual analogue pain scores, pain relief scores and satisfaction scores between the bolus and infusion groups. Furthermore, low pain scores and high pain relief scores indicated that both treatment modalities provided effective pain control. Similarly, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the various tests used to assess depression or neuropsychological function (i.e., memory, vigilance, attention and processing). There was a significantly greater degree of dose escalation in patients receiving continuous infusion compared to patients receiving repeated bolus doses. For 6 patients in the infusion group the catheter was sited in the intrathecal space, as the dose requirements by the epidural route exceeded the delivery capacity of the pump. For 4 patients in the bolus group the catheter was similarly sited, due to pain on injection and leakage/blockage.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
A transdermal formulation of fentanyl (TTS-fentanyl, Alza Corp., Palo Alto, CA) was evaluated in 13 surgical patients after an abdominal operation. An intraoperative dose of fentanyl (100-200 micrograms i.v.) was administered at the same time as the TTS-fentanyl systems (50-125 micrograms/h) were applied to the antero-lateral chest wall. The TTS-fentanyl systems remained in situ for 24 h and were then removed and a second lot of systems were applied to the contra-lateral chest wall. There was a mean (S.D.) delay time of 12.7 (9.6) h before minimum effective blood fentanyl concentrations (MEC) were obtained from the systems and pseudo-steady state was reached between 36 and 48 h. There was a decay time of 16.1 (7.1) h after the systems were removed for the blood fentanyl concentration to decrease to less than the mean MEC for the control of postoperative pain. There was marked variability between patients in the actual hourly fentanyl dose rate determined from the residual amount of fentanyl remaining in the system and the duration of application. Significantly more supplementary pethidine was administered for inadequate postoperative analgesia between 0 and 12 h compared to the 12-24, 24-36 and 36-48 h periods; this was consistent with the observed delay time. Three patients required a reduction in the hourly fentanyl dose rate because of bradypnoea while 1 patient required an increase in dose because of inadequate pain relief. Nausea was the most frequently reported side effect (85% of patients) while bradypnoea, drowsiness, unpleasant dreams and headache were also reported. These effects were due to the combined effects of a sustained blood fentanyl concentration and the intermittent supplementary pethidine doses. Side effects due to the topical formulation were transient and included erythema (8 patients) and a minor rash (2 patients) in the area occluded by the systems. The TTS-fentanyl systems provided a significant contribution to postoperative pain control but, at the TTS dose rates used, supplementary doses of pethidine were required by all patients probably to control 'incident' pain.
Twenty-four patients with severe pain related to cancer completed a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover study examining morphine pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics when the same 24-h morphine dose was administered using two modified release oral morphine formulations; either one dose of Kapanol (a new sustained release polymer coated pellet formulation administered in capsule form, Glaxo Wellcome group of companies) per 24 h, or MS Contin (Purdue Frederick Company, Connecticut, USA) administered at 12-h intervals. The morphine dose was optimised for each patient using an immediate release morphine solution in the lead-in period to provide the most favourable balance between pain relief and side-effects. Patients were then randomly allocated to receive their 24-h morphine dose as either Kapanol or MS Contin in period 1. Patients recorded daily measures of pain relief and morphine related side-effects (morphine pharmacodynamics) in a diary. Patients were admitted to the Pain Management Unit on the morning of day 7 (+/- 1 day) and frequent blood samples were collected for 24 h following the 10:00 h dose to fully characterise the pharmacokinetic profile for morphine and its metabolites at steady state. Morphine pharmacodynamics and the amount and timing of rescue medication (dextromoramide) were also recorded during this time. Period 2, which commenced at 10:00 h on day 8, was identical to period 1 except the modified release formulations were changed. The pharmacokinetic profile of Kapanol exhibited a significantly higher Cmin (minimum plasma morphine concentration), less fluctuation in plasma morphine concentration throughout the dosing interval, a longer Tmax (time associated with the maximum morphine concentration) and a greater time that the plasma morphine concentration was > or = 75% of Cmax (an index of the control the formulation exerts over the morphine release rate) compared to that of MS Contin. Some of these pharmacokinetic differences (e.g., Cmin and fluctuation in plasma morphine concentration) were surprising given that the dosing interval for Kapanol (24 h) was double that of MS Contin (12 h). There was no significant difference between the Kapanol and MS Contin treatment phases in any of the pharmacodynamic parameters, morphine related side-effects, the percentage of patients taking rescue medication as well as the amount or time to the first dose of rescue analgesia on day 7 in periods 1 and 2, patient or investigator assessments of global efficacy at the end of periods 1 and 2, or patient treatment preference at the end of the study. Once a day Kapanol provided the same degree of pain relief and morphine related side-effects as 12-h MS Contin.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.