Celecoxib-tramadol co-crystal in patients with moderate-to-severe pain following bunionectomy with osteotomy: A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, factorial, active- and placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Celecoxib-tramadol co-crystal (CTC) is a first-in-class analgesic co-crystal of celecoxib and racemic tramadol with an improved pharmacologic profile, conferred by the co-crystal structure, compared with its active constituents administered alone/concomitantly. AIM: We evaluated CTC in moderate-to-severe acute postoperative pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, factorial, active- and placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (NCT03108482) was conducted at 6 US clinical research centers. Adults with moderate-to-severe acute pain following bunionectomy with osteotomy were randomized to oral CTC (200 mg [112 mg celecoxib/88 mg rac-tramadol hydrochloride] every 12 h), tramadol (50 mg every 6 h), celecoxib (100 mg every 12 h), or placebo for 48 h. Patients, investigators, and personnel were blinded to assignment. The primary endpoint was the 0-48 h sum of pain intensity differences (SPID0-48) in all randomized patients. Pain intensity was assessed on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS). Safety was analyzed in patients who received study medication. Funded by ESTEVE Pharmaceuticals. RESULTS: In 2017 (March to November), 1323 patients were screened and 637 randomized to CTC (n = 184), tramadol (n = 183), celecoxib (n = 181), or placebo (n = 89). Mean baseline NRS was 6.7 in all active groups. CTC had a significantly greater effect on SPID0-48 (least-squares mean: -139.1 [95% confidence interval: -151.8, -126.5]) than tramadol (-109.1 [-121.7, -96.4]; p < 0.001), celecoxib (-103.7 [-116.4, -91.0]; p < 0.001), or placebo (-74.6 [-92.5, -56.6]; p < 0.001). Total treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 358 for CTC and 394 for tramadol. Drug-related TEAEs occurred in 37.7% patients in the CTC group, compared with 48.6% in the tramadol group. There were no serious TEAEs/deaths. CONCLUSION: CTC provided greater analgesia than comparable daily doses of tramadol and celecoxib, with similar tolerability to tramadol. CTC is approved in the United States.

Angiopoietin-like 3-derivative LNA043 for cartilage regeneration in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 1 trial.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common, debilitating, chronic disease with no disease-modifying drug approved to date. We discovered LNA043-a derivative of angiopoietin-like 3 (ANGPTL3)-as a potent chondrogenesis inducer using a phenotypic screen with human mesenchymal stem cells. We show that LNA043 promotes chondrogenesis and cartilage matrix synthesis in vitro and regenerates hyaline articular cartilage in preclinical OA and cartilage injury models in vivo. LNA043 exerts at least part of these effects through binding to the fibronectin receptor, integrin α5ß1 on mesenchymal stem cells and chondrocytes. In a first-in-human (phase 1), randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose, single-center trial ( NCT02491281 ; sponsored by Novartis Pharmaceuticals), 28 patients with knee OA were injected intra-articularly with LNA043 or placebo (3:1 ratio) either 2 h, 7 d or 21 d before total knee replacement. LNA043 met its primary safety endpoint and showed short serum pharmacokinetics, cartilage penetration and a lack of immunogenicity (secondary endpoints). Post-hoc transcriptomics profiling of cartilage revealed that a single LNA043 injection reverses the OA transcriptome signature over at least 21 d, inducing the expression of hyaline cartilage matrix components and anabolic signaling pathways, while suppressing mediators of OA progression. LNA043 is a novel disease-modifying OA drug candidate that is currently in a phase 2b trial ( NCT04864392 ) in patients with knee OA.

Efficacy and safety of fasinumab in patients with chronic low back pain: a phase II/III randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy and safety of fasinumab in moderate-to-severe, chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: In this phase II/III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with CLBP aged ≥35 years with inadequate pain relief/intolerance to acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids were randomised to fasinumab 6 or 9 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks (Q4W), 9 mg intravenous every 8 weeks (Q8W) or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 16 in average daily low back pain intensity (LBPI) numeric rating score. Key secondary efficacy variables included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Patient Global Assessment (PGA). The results are based on a modified intent-to-treat analysis of 563/800 planned patients when enrolment was stopped early given emerging signals of joint risk in other osteoarthritis (OA) studies at doses being tested here. RESULTS: Significant placebo-adjusted LBPI reductions at week 16 were observed for fasinumab 9 mg Q4W and Q8W (least squares mean (standard error) -0.7 (0.3); both nominal p<0.05), but not 6 mg (-0.3 (0.3); p=0.39). RMDQ and PGA improvements to week 16 were greatest for fasinumab 9 mg intravenous. Numerically greater efficacy occurred in patients with, versus those without, peripheral OA (pOA) over 16 weeks. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 274/418 (65.6%) patients in the combined fasinumab groups and 94/140 (67.1%) placebo patients. Joint AEs, mostly rapid progressive OA type 1, were more frequent in the combined fasinumab groups (19 events in 16 patients (3.8%) vs 1 event in 1 patient (0.7%) for placebo); all except one occurred in pOA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Fasinumab highest doses, but not lower dose, improved both CLBP pain and function. Most joint AEs occurred in pOA patients, consistent with earlier findings in symptomatic OA. Further study is needed of patients with CLBP with and without pOA to determine optimal benefit-risk.

Buprenorphine buccal film for chronic pain management.

Buprenorphine is a Schedule III opioid with unique pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties that contribute to effective analgesia and fewer safety risks than other opioids. This review article focuses on the buccal film formulation, which is preferable to other buprenorphine formulations on the basis of bioavailability, safety and efficacy. The clinical studies reviewed here confirm that buprenorphine buccal film offers effective and continuous pain relief that is generally well tolerated, with no cases of respiratory depression reported in any of the studies. On the basis of these clinical data and individual patient risk/benefit assessments, clinicians should consider utilizing buprenorphine buccal film as a first-line opioid treatment for chronic pain over other buprenorphine formulations or other opioids.

Measuring Opioid Withdrawal in a Phase 3 Study of a New Analgesic, NKTR-181 (Oxycodegol), in Patients with Moderate to Severe Chronic Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the SUMMIT-07 trial opioid withdrawal results of NKTR-181 (oxycodegol), a new molecular entity mu-opioid receptor agonist. DESIGN: Phase 3, enriched-enrollment, double-blind, randomized-withdrawal study in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). SETTING: Conducted in the United States at multiple sites. METHODS: SUMMIT-07 was comprised of five periods: screening; NKTR-181 open-label titration (100 to 400 mg twice daily); 12-week randomized, double-blind study drug (NKTR-181 or placebo); one-week study drug taper; and two-week safety follow-up. Permitted rescue medication included hydrocodone 5 mg/acetaminophen 300 mg (two tablets daily) for two weeks after randomization, then acetaminophen 1.0 gm daily for the remainder of the trial. Signs and symptoms of drug withdrawal were evaluated using the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS); Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS); Misuse, Abuse, and Diversion Drug Event Reporting System (MADDERS); and withdrawal-related adverse events. RESULTS: Of 1,190 patients entering titration, one patient had moderate withdrawal (COWS score 13/48 maximum) three days after discontinuing NKTR-181. Of 610 patients randomized (N = 309, NKTR-181; N = 301, placebo), no COWS scores indicating withdrawal at a moderate level or greater (i.e., score ≥13) were observed at any time point. At day 8 after randomization, week 12, and the end of tapering, COWS scores indicating mild withdrawal (<13) were observed in seven (2.4%), one (0.4%), and one (0.5%) placebo patients, respectively, and three (1.0%), one (0.4%), and five (2.3%) NKTR-181 patients, respectively. Mean SOWS scores in both arms were ≤2.8 of 64 possible points at all time points. During the randomized period, of 35 events identified by MADDERS, adjudicators identified 20 possible "withdrawal" events (9 [2.9%] NKTR-181 and 11 [3.7%] placebo). CONCLUSIONS: NKTR-181 exhibited a low rate and severity of opioid withdrawal in SUMMIT-07 patients with CLBP.

Long-term Safety and Tolerability of NKTR-181 in Patients with Moderate to Severe Chronic Low Back Pain or Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Phase 3 Multicenter, Open-Label, 52-Week Study (SUMMIT-08 LTS).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety of NKTR-181, a novel mu-opioid receptor agonist that may have reduced human abuse potential, in patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain (CLBP) or other chronic noncancer pain (CNP). DESIGN: Uncontrolled, multicenter, open-label, long-term study of NKTR-181 comprised of three periods: screening (≤21 days), treatment (52 weeks), and safety follow-up (∼14 days after the last dose of NKTR-181). SETTING: Multicenter, long-term clinical research study. METHODS: NKTR-181 administered at doses of 100-600 mg twice daily (BID) was evaluated in opioid-naïve and opioid-experienced patients. Patients were enrolled de novo or following completion of the randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 efficacy study (SUMMIT-07). Safety assessments included adverse event documentation, measurements of opioid withdrawal, and clinical laboratory tests. Effectiveness was assessed using the modified Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (mBPI-SF). RESULTS: The study enrolled 638 patients. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were constipation (26%) and nausea (12%). Serious TEAEs, reported in 5% of patients, were deemed by investigators to be unrelated to NKTR-181. There were no deaths or reported cases of respiratory depression. A sustained reduction in mBPI-SF pain intensity and pain interference from baseline to study termination was observed throughout treatment. Only 2% of patients discontinued NKTR-181 due to lack of efficacy, and 11% discontinued due to treatment-related AEs. NKTR-181 doses of up to 600 mg BID were generally well tolerated, and patients experienced low rates of opioid-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The study results support the premise that NKTR-181 is a safe and effective option for patients with moderate to severe CLBP or CNP.

Effects of naltrexone exposure observed in two phase three studies with ALO-02, an extended-release oxycodone surrounding sequestered naltrexone.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effects of naltrexone following ALO-02 administration. DESIGN: Two phase three studies: an open-label, single-arm safety study, and a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal, efficacy study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01428583, NCT01571362). SETTING: Seventy US research centers. PATIENTS: Eight hundred and five patients with moderate-to-severe chronic noncancer pain (n = 395) or moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain (n = 410). INTERVENTIONS: Oral ALO-02 capsules (daily dose 20-160 mg oxycodone): openlabel titration followed by double-blind fixed dose ALO-02 or placebo (12 weeks) for the efficacy study; and open-label administration (≤12 months) for the safety study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-sf), withdrawal-related adverse events, Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS), and naltrexone plasma concentrations. RESULTS: ALO-02 was received for = 30 days by 592 patients (73.5 percent), = 90 days by 348 patients (43.2 percent), and ≤361 days by 105 patients (13.0 percent). Maximum COWS scores were below the cutoff for mild withdrawal for the majority of patients: 86.6 percent of patients in the safety study, and for the efficacy study, 96.8 percent during titration and 95.0 percent during double-blind treatment. The frequency of quantifiable naltrexone plasma concentrations was similar between studies (18-23 percent of samples), and the levels were low, generally not exceeding 200 pg/mL. There was no apparent relationship between naltrexone plasma concentrations and COWS scores (total or change from baseline), or change from baseline in BPI-sf scores in the efficacy (R2 = 0.0184, 0.0224, and 0.0173, respectively) or safety studies (R2 = 0.0010, 0.0000, and 0.0122, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Naltrexone plasma concentrations were low, not correlated with COWS or BPI-sf scores, and considered clinically insignificant.

HTX-011 reduced pain intensity and opioid consumption versus bupivacaine HCl in bunionectomy: phase III results from the randomized EPOCH 1 study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a need for local anesthetics that provide consistent analgesia through 72 hours after surgery. This study evaluates the use of HTX-011 (bupivacaine and meloxicam in Biochronomerpolymer technology), an extended-release, dual-acting local anesthetic, in reducing both postoperative pain over 72 hours and postoperative opioid use when compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) and saline placebo. Inclusion of low-dose meloxicam in HTX-011 is designed to reduce local inflammation caused by surgery, potentiating the analgesic effect of bupivacaine. Previously, significant synergy has been observed with bupivacaine and meloxicam with both given locally together. METHODS: EPOCH 1 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled phase III study in subjects undergoing a primary unilateral, distal, first metatarsal bunionectomy in which subjects received either a single intraoperative dose of HTX-011, immediate-release bupivacaine HCl or saline placebo. RESULTS: A total of 412 subjects were dosed. The results for the primary and all four key secondary endpoints were statistically significant in favor of HTX-011. HTX-011 demonstrated superior, sustained pain reduction through 72 hours, significantly reduced opioid consumption and resulted in significantly more opioid-free subjects compared with saline placebo and bupivacaine HCl. Safety was similar across groups with fewer opioid-related adverse events observed in the HTX-011 group. CONCLUSIONS: HTX-011 demonstrated significant reduction in postoperative pain through 72 hours with significant reduction in opioid consumption and a significant increase in the proportion of opioid-free subjects compared with saline placebo and the most widely used local anesthetic, bupivacaine HCl. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03295721.

Assessment of potentially abuse-related events in two phase 3 studies of NKTR-181, a novel opioid analgesic, using the MADDERS® system (Misuse, Abuse, and Diversion Drug Event Reporting System).

Objective: To prospectively evaluate the abuse potential of NKTR-181, a novel opioid analgesic, in two phase 3 clinical trials using a newly developed reporting system: the Misuse, Abuse, and Diversion Drug Event Reporting System (MADDERS®).Methods: SUMMIT-07 was an enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal study that examined the safety and efficacy of NKTR-181 across 12 weeks in opioid-naïve subjects with chronic low back pain. SUMMIT-LTS was a 52 week open-label study in opioid-naïve and experienced subjects with chronic low back pain or noncancer pain rolled over from SUMMIT-07 or enrolled de novo. System evaluations were triggered by adverse events of interest and drug accountability discrepancies signaling potentially abuse-related events. Each event was assigned a primary classification and supplementary classification(s) by investigators and by a blinded, independent committee of substance abuse experts (adjudicators). At the final study visit, investigators administered a survey to subjects to identify overlooked events of interest.Results: Seventy-nine (6.6%) of 1189 subjects were associated with 86 events in SUMMIT-07 and 51 (8.0%) of 638 subjects were associated with 59 events in SUMMIT-LTS. Most events were attributed to "Withdrawal" and, primarily in SUMMIT-07, "Therapeutic Error" (unintentional overuse) or "Misuse" (intentional overuse for a therapeutic purpose) of study medication. Adjudicators identified five possible "Abuse" events (three NKTR-181, two placebo) in SUMMIT-07 and four possible "Abuse" events (all NKTR-181) in SUMMIT-LTS.Conclusions: The MADDERS® system discerns potentially abuse-related events and identified low rates of withdrawal and a low risk of abuse potential, diversion or addiction associated with NKTR-181 in phase 3 trials.

SUMMIT-07: a randomized trial of NKTR-181, a new molecular entity, full mu-opioid receptor agonist for chronic low-back pain.

NKTR-181, a new molecular entity, mu-opioid receptor agonist with an inherently slow rate of central nervous system (CNS) entry, was designed to provide analgesia while reducing abuse potential. This phase 3, enriched-enrollment, randomized-withdrawal trial evaluated the analgesic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of NKTR-181 in patients with chronic low-back pain (CLBP). Adults with moderate-to-severe CLBP refractory to nonopioid analgesics achieving an analgesic NKTR-181 dosage (100-400 mg twice daily) during the open-label titration period were randomized to continued NKTR-181 treatment, double-blind, or switched to placebo. The study was conducted at 55 sites in the United States. Of 1189 patients exposed to NKTR-181 during the titration period, 610 were randomized to NKTR-181 100 to 400 mg every 12 hours or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was change in weekly pain score (scale, 0-10) at 12 weeks from randomization baseline. Secondary outcome measures included responder rates defined by ≥30% and ≥50% improvement in pain score from screening to 12 weeks. Among 610 randomized patients, the mean pain score decreased from 6.73 to 2.32 during open-label titration. After randomization, the least-squares mean change in pain score was +0.92 for NKTR-181 vs +1.46 for placebo (P = 0.002). The ≥30%-improvement responder rate of NKTR-181 vs placebo was 71.2% vs 57.1% (P < 0.001), and the ≥50%-improvement responder rate was 51.1% vs 37.9% (P = 0.001). NKTR-181 was well tolerated with a low incidence (<3%) of CNS-related adverse events during the randomized treatment phase. In patients with moderate-to-severe CLBP, NKTR-181 demonstrated significant analgesic efficacy and a favorable safety/tolerability profile, with a low incidence of CNS adverse events.

A Phase II Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Safety and Efficacy Study of Lenalidomide in Lumbar Radicular Pain with a Long-Term Open-Label Extension Phase.

Objective: This phase II study assessed lenalidomide efficacy and safety. Design: Three-phase core study: 14-day prerandomization, 12-week treatment, and 52-week open-label extension. Setting: Fourteen US centers from July 2005 to July 2007. Subjects: Chronic lumbar radicular pain patients without history of nerve injury or deficit. Methods: Subjects were randomized (1:1) to double-blind treatment with lenalidomide 10 mg or placebo once daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 52-week open-label extension. A 12-week, single-center, randomized-withdrawal (1:2, lenalidomide:placebo), exploratory study with open-label extension was undertaken in 12 subjects from the core extension who were naïve to neuropathic medications and with at least a two-point decrease from baseline average daily Pain Intensity-Numerical Rating Scale score. Results: Of 180 subjects enrolled, 176 had at least one postbaseline measure; 132 completed the 12-week treatment phase. In the core study, no statistically significant difference in Pain Intensity-Numerical Rating Scale mean change (-0.02, P = 0.958) was observed at week 12 between lenalidomide and placebo; proportions achieving pain reduction at week 12 and other secondary measures were comparable between lenalidomide and placebo. In the exploratory study, week 12 mean changes in Pain Intensity-Numerical Rating Scale scores were -0.05 (lenalidomide: N = 3) and 2.11 (placebo: N = 8). Mean changes in Brief Pain Inventory-short form interference scores were -3.33 and 8.38, respectively; scores at six months were maintained or decreased in 10 of 12 subjects. Conclusions: While this study does not support lenalidomide use in an unselected lumbar radicular pain population, an immunomodulating agent may relieve pain in select subjects naïve to neuropathic pain medications.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00120120.

Efficacy and tolerability of buccal buprenorphine in opioid-experienced patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain: results of a phase 3, enriched enrollment, randomized withdrawal study.

A buccal film of buprenorphine (BBUP) was evaluated for safety and efficacy in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched-enrollment, randomized-withdrawal study in opioid-experienced patients (30 to ≤160 mg/d morphine sulfate equivalent) with moderate to severe chronic low back pain taking around-the-clock opioid analgesics. Patients' opioid doses were tapered to ≤30 mg morphine sulfate equivalent before open-label titration with BBUP (range, 150-900 µg every 12 hours). Patients who responded (received adequate analgesia that was generally well tolerated for 14 days) were randomized to receive buprenorphine (n = 254) or placebo (n = 257) buccal film. The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline to week 12 of double-blind treatment in mean average daily pain-intensity scores using a rating scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). In the intent-to-treat population, mean pain scores were 6.7 after opioid taper and declined to 2.8 after the BBUP titration period. After randomization, mean pain scores were lower in the BBUP group than in the placebo group; the difference between groups in the mean change from baseline to week 12 was -0.98 (95% CI, -1.32 to -0.64; P < 0.001). A significantly larger percentage of patients receiving BBUP than placebo had pain reductions ≥30% and ≥50% (P < 0.001 for both). In the double-blind portion of the study, the only adverse event reported more frequently with BBUP than placebo and in ≥5% of patients was vomiting (5.5% vs 2.3%). These findings demonstrate the efficacy and tolerability of BBUP in opioid-experienced patients taking around-the-clock opioid treatment for chronic low back pain.

Pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain: results from three controlled trials using different surgical models.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin (150 or 300 mg/d) as an adjunctive therapy for the treatment of postoperative pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study reports findings from three separate, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain. Patients underwent one of three categories of surgical procedures (one procedure per study): elective inguinal hernia repair (post-IHR); elective total knee arthroplasty (post-TKA); or total abdominal hysterectomy (posthysterectomy). The primary endpoint in each trial, mean worst pain over the past 24 hours, was assessed 24 hours post-IHR and posthysterectomy, and 48 hours post-TKA. Patients rated their pain on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater pain severity. RESULTS: In total, 425 (post-IHR), 307 (post-TKA), and 501 (posthysterectomy) patients were randomized to treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between the pregabalin and placebo groups with respect to the primary endpoint in any of the three trials. The least squares mean difference in worst pain, between 300 mg/d pregabalin and placebo, was -0.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] =-1.4, -0.1; Hochberg adjusted P=0.067) post-IHR; -0.34 (95% CI =-1.07, 0.39; P=0.362) post-TKA; and -0.2 (95% CI =-0.66, 0.31; P=0.471) posthysterectomy. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences between pregabalin and placebo with respect to the primary pain intensity measure in each of the three clinical trials. These studies encompass a large dataset (1,233 patients in total), and their results should be considered when assessing pregabalin's effectiveness in postoperative pain. Further studies are required to determine the potential pain-reducing benefit of pregabalin in the postoperative setting.

IV acetaminophen: Efficacy of a single dose for postoperative pain after hip arthroplasty: subset data analysis of 2 unpublished randomized clinical trials.

Inadequate control of postoperative pain after orthopedic procedures may trigger complications that increase morbidity. Multimodal analgesia is used to manage pain effectively after surgical procedures and reduce the need for rescue analgesia. Intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (OFIRMEV; Cadence Pharmaceuticals, Inc.), an analgesic that has been studied and used in the multimodal management of acute pain after major orthopedic procedures, combines the safety seen with oral and rectal formulations with a preferred route of administration. Two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials were conducted (total 130 patients) to determine the efficacy and safety of single-dose IV acetaminophen in patients following total hip arthroplasty. Although both studies were stopped prematurely, overlap in patient populations, study design, and methodologies in the single-dose phase of these studies allowed for analysis of their results to be presented concurrently. Both trials demonstrated IV acetaminophen having greater efficacy than placebo in terms of primary endpoints [pain intensity differences from T0.5 to T3 (P < 0.05 in both studies)]. The use of IV acetaminophen also reduced the need for rescue opioid consumption, with patients receiving IV acetaminophen consuming, on average, less than half the amount of rescue medication as those receiving placebo. IV acetaminophen was effective in treating moderate-to-severe pain after total hip arthroplasty and reduced the need for rescue opioid consumption.

Efficacy and safety of intravenous tanezumab for the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis: 2 randomized controlled trials versus naproxen.

OBJECTIVE: Two studies evaluated efficacy and safety of tanezumab versus naproxen for treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Randomized controlled studies [NCT00830063 (Study 1015, n=828) and NCT00863304 (Study 1018, n=840)] of subjects with hip or knee OA compared intravenous tanezumab (5 mg or 10 mg) to placebo and naproxen (500 mg twice daily). Coprimary outcomes were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain, WOMAC Physical Function (0-10 numerical rating scale), and patient's global assessment of OA at Week 16. RESULTS: In both studies, tanezumab reduced pain versus placebo [least squares mean differences, 95% CI, tanezumab 5 mg: -1.21 (-1.72, -0.70); -1.13 (-1.65, -0.62); tanezumab 10 mg: -0.91 (-1.42, -0.40); -0.80 (-1.32, -0.29)], and improved function and global scores. Tanezumab 5 mg produced greater pain reduction [-0.76 (-1.28, -0.25); -0.69 (-1.21, -0.17)], and favorable functional and global outcomes versus naproxen. Pain reductions with tanezumab 10 mg versus naproxen did not reach significance, unlike functional (both studies) and global (1 study) outcomes; thus, tanezumab 10 mg was not superior to naproxen, and predefined statistical testing procedures were not met, allowing for conclusion of superiority of tanezumab 5 mg over naproxen despite replicated favorable coprimary outcomes. Tanezumab was associated with greater incidence of peripheral sensory adverse events (paresthesia, hyperesthesia, hypoesthesia, burning sensation), pain in extremity, peripheral edema, and arthralgia. Overall frequency and discontinuations as a result of adverse events were similar to placebo and naproxen. CONCLUSION: Tanezumab provides efficacious treatment of knee or hip OA and may have therapeutic utility in patients with OA who experience inadequate analgesia with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.

Long-term safety and effectiveness of tanezumab as treatment for chronic low back pain.

A noncontrolled, randomized, multicenter study (NCT00924664) evaluated long-term safety and effectiveness of tanezumab in patients with chronic low back pain following a randomized placebo- and active-controlled parent study that evaluated analgesic efficacy. Patients were randomized to tanezumab 10mg (n=321) or 20mg (n=527) administered at 8-week intervals via 3 intravenous injections followed by 4 subcutaneous injections. Effectiveness analyses included change from parent study baseline in Brief Pain Inventory Short Form, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, and Patient's Global Assessment of low back pain. Safety assessments included adverse event documentation, physical/neurological examinations, and laboratory tests. Mean treatment duration during the extension study was 194 and 202 days with tanezumab 10 and 20mg, respectively. Both tanezumab doses provided similar and sustained improvements in all effectiveness outcomes. The most frequently reported adverse events were arthralgia, paresthesia, and hypoesthesia. Adverse events initially described as osteonecrosis were reported in 6 patients (tanezumab 10mg, n=2; tanezumab 20mg, n=4); 9 additional patients (tanezumab 10mg, n=7; tanezumab 20mg, n=2) underwent total joint replacement (TJR). A blinded, independent adjudication committee reviewed all 6 patients with reported osteonecrosis and 4 of the 9 patients undergoing TJR. Adjudication outcomes were osteonecrosis (n=0), worsening osteoarthritis (n=5; 1 rapidly progressive), and another diagnosis or indeterminate (n=5). Tanezumab 10mg had better tolerability than tanezumab 20mg, and may represent an effective long-term treatment for chronic low back pain.

Efficacy and safety of tanezumab versus naproxen in the treatment of chronic low back pain.

Tanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that specifically inhibits nerve growth factor as a treatment for chronic pain. This phase IIB study investigated the efficacy and safety of tanezumab for chronic low back pain vs placebo and naproxen. Patients (N=1347) received intravenous tanezumab (5, 10, or 20mg every 8weeks), naproxen (500mg twice daily), or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was mean change in daily average low back pain intensity (LBPI) from baseline to week 16. Secondary end points included mean change from baseline to week 16 in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of low back pain. Tanezumab 10 and 20mg had similar efficacy profiles and significantly improved LBPI, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, and PGA scores vs both placebo and naproxen (P⩽.05). Tanezumab 5mg provided improvement of PGA scores vs placebo (P⩽.05), and naproxen resulted in significant improvement of LBPI vs placebo (P⩽.05). Adverse event incidence was comparable across tanezumab doses but higher than with placebo or naproxen. Arthralgia, pain in extremity, headache, and paresthesia were the most commonly reported adverse events by tanezumab-treated patients. The most frequently reported adverse events resulting in discontinuation of tanezumab treatment were arthralgia and paresthesia; the highest frequency was observed with tanezumab 20mg (both 1.4%). Serious adverse event incidence was similar across treatments. In conclusion, tanezumab provided significantly greater improvement in pain, function, and global scores vs placebo and naproxen in patients with chronic low back pain.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of dual-opioid treatment with morphine plus oxycodone versus oxycodone/acetaminophen for moderate to severe acute pain after total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: In acute pain models, coadministration of low doses of morphine and oxycodone markedly enhanced analgesia relative to either opioid given alone. Enhanced analgesia with coadministration of morphine and oxycodone has also been reported in acute and chronic moderate to severe pain conditions during double-blind studies. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a flexible dose regimen of the morphine/oxycodone combination versus oxycodone/acetaminophen and fixed low-dose morphine/oxycodone. METHODS: This was a 5-center, randomized, open-label study of hospitalized patients (n = 44) with acute moderate to severe postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty. Inpatients were randomized to a flexible dose regimen of morphine/oxycodone (3 mg/2 mg to 24 mg/16 mg), fixed low-dose morphine/oxycodone regimen (3 mg/2 mg), or oxycodone/acetaminophen (5 mg/325 mg). Treatment was initiated following surgery after intravenous (IV) morphine patient-controlled analgesia. An algorithm was evaluated for converting the patient-controlled analgesia morphine dose to an initial oral dose of morphine/oxycodone. The primary efficacy variable was the time-weighted sum of pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 hours. RESULTS: The median values for the sum of the pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 hours for the morphine/oxycodone flexible dose and oxycodone/acetaminophen were similar and approximately twice that of fixed morphine/oxycodone 3 mg/2 mg (148.0, 139.5, and 71.3, respectively). Moderate to severe gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in 50% of patients in the oxycodone/acetaminophen group compared with 15% of the equianalgesic morphine/oxycodone group. On several items of the Brief Pain Inventory (general activity, walking ability, and sleep), the morphine/oxycodone flexible dose produced greater benefit than oxycodone/acetaminophen. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible dose morphine/oxycodone was superior to low-dose morphine/oxycodone and comparable to oxycodone/acetaminophen. Flexible dose morphine/oxycodone-treated patients had a lower rate of moderate to severe nausea or vomiting than equianalgesic oxycodone/acetaminophen-treated patients. Thus, morphine/oxycodone offers an attractive alternative to oxycodone/acetaminophen for the management of moderate to severe postoperative pain.

Effectiveness and safety of diclofenac epolamine topical patch 1.3% for the treatment of acute pain due to back strain: an open-label, uncontrolled study.

BACKGROUND: The diclofenac epolamine topical patch 1.3% (DETP) is indicated for topical treatment of acute pain due to minor strains, sprains, and contusions. This exploratory, multicenter, open-label study evaluated effectiveness and safety of DETP in patients with acute pain due to back strain. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with acute pain due to nonradicular back strain with an average pain intensity of ≥ 4 (0 = no pain, 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine) entered a 3-day observation/washout period and completed daily diary modified Brief Pain Inventory assessments. At baseline, patients with an average pain intensity of ≥ 4 started DETP treatment (q12h). Patients were treated for 7 or 14 days, depending on investigator and patient assessment of pain resolution. Primary endpoint was mean change from baseline to end of treatment in average pain intensity. Key secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in least, worst, and current pain scores and Beck Depression Inventory(®) II scores. Patients and investigators assessed patch satisfaction and global pain relief. RESULTS: In 123 enrolled patients, baseline mean ± standard deviation average pain score was 6.5 ± 1.3, which decreased to 2.5 ± 2.4 (P < 0.0001) at end of treatment. Similarly, least, worst, and current pain scores were also reduced (P < 0.0001). Sixty-three percent of patients achieved ≥ 50% pain reduction from baseline. At the end of treatment, most patients (88%) were satisfied or very satisfied with DETP. For 85% of patients, investigators also reported being satisfied or very satisfied with DETP. Most patients (87%) and investigators (88%, rating the patient's response) rated global pain relief as moderate to complete. Fifteen patients experienced a total of 19 adverse events (AEs), 17 of which were mild to moderate, and 2 of which were severe. Three AEs were treatment related (application site rash, nausea, and tachycardia); 1 patient had a serious AE (noncardiac chest pain) considered unrelated to DETP. CONCLUSION: In this exploratory study, patients experienced well-tolerated relief for acute pain due to back strain, with ≥ 85% of patients and their investigators expressing satisfaction with DETP treatment.

A multiple-day regimen of parecoxib sodium 20 mg twice daily provides pain relief after total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, multiple-dose, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the analgesic efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens of parecoxib sodium (parecoxib) versus placebo after total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: On study Day 1, 490 patients received a postoperative initial loading dose of IV parecoxib 40 mg, followed by a re-dose of parecoxib 20 mg in 484 of 490 patients. Subsequently, 479 randomized patients received double-blind treatment with parecoxib 20 mg bid (n = 159), parecoxib 20 mg qd (n = 159) followed by placebo, or placebo (n = 161) on Day 2. RESULTS: Patients treated with parecoxib 20 mg bid reported significantly lower summed pain intensity over 24 h (SPI-24) scores and improved patients' global evaluation of study medication (PGESM) ratings compared with placebo-treated patients on Days 2 to 5 (P < 0.05). For patients treated with parecoxib 20 mg qd, SPI-24 scores were significantly lower on Days 3 and 4 (P < 0.05), and PGESM ratings significantly improved on Day 5 compared with placebo. The incidence of adverse events was similar in all treatment groups with the exception of fever, vomiting and impaired concentration, which were significantly more common in the placebo group compared with one or other of the parecoxib treatment groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Multiple-day administration of parecoxib 20 mg once or twice daily is effective and generally well tolerated after total hip arthroplasty.