Feasibility of delivering influenza vaccine to household contacts of pediatric patients in a residents' continuity clinic.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, influenza vaccine has been recommended for household contacts (HCs) of healthy infants and young children, who are at high risk for complications from influenza disease. We examined the feasibility of providing influenza vaccine to HCs of pediatric patients during the children's outpatient clinic visits. METHODS: During influenza season 2006-07, influenza vaccine was offered at no cost to HCs of all patients aged <60 months who received primary care at a pediatric residents' continuity clinic at Children's Medical Center Dallas. The percentage of individuals receiving their first dose of influenza vaccine was calculated for all vaccinated adult HCs and also for a subset of vaccinated adult HCs for whom vaccine was recommended in a previous year, based on the pediatric patient's age. RESULTS: Influenza vaccine was administered to 1,042 HCs of 611 pediatric patients. Fifty percent of all vaccinated adult HCs had no previous history of influenza vaccination. Eighty-five of the 218 (39%) vaccinated adult HCs for whom influenza vaccine was also recommended in a previous year received their first dose through our program. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of influenza vaccine to HCs of pediatric patients can be integrated into the children's clinic visits and may increase vaccine uptake.

Efficacy and safety of topiramate for the treatment of chronic migraine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of topiramate (100 mg/day) compared with placebo for the treatment of chronic migraine. METHODS: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study consisting of 16 weeks of double-blind treatment. Subjects aged 18 to 65 years with 15 or more headache days per month, at least half of which were migraine/migrainous headaches, were randomized 1:1 to either topiramate 100 mg/day or placebo. An initial dose of topiramate 25 mg/day (or placebo) was titrated upward in weekly increments of 25 mg/day to a maximum of 100 mg/day (or to the maximum tolerated dose). Concomitant preventive migraine treatment was not allowed, and acute headache medication use was not to exceed 4 days per week during the double-blind maintenance period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in the mean monthly number of migraine/migrainous days; the change in the mean monthly number of migraine days also was analyzed. A fixed sequence approach (ie, gatekeeper approach) using analysis of covariance was used to analyze the efficacy endpoints. Assessments of safety and tolerability included physical and neurologic examinations, clinical laboratory parameters, and spontaneous reports of clinical adverse events. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 306 (topiramate, n = 153; placebo, n = 153) of 328 randomized subjects who provided at least 1 efficacy assessment; 55.8% of the topiramate group and 55.2% on placebo were trial completers. The mean final topiramate maintenance dose was 86.0 mg/day. The mean duration of therapy was 91.7 days for the topiramate group and 90.6 days for the placebo group. Topiramate treatment resulted in a statistically significant mean reduction of migraine/migrainous headache days (topiramate -6.4 vs placebo -4.7, P= .010) and migraine headache days relative to baseline (topiramate -5.6 vs placebo -4.1, P= .032). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 132 (82.5%) and 113 (70.2%) of topiramate-treated and placebo-treated subjects, respectively, and were generally of mild or moderate severity. Most commonly reported adverse events in the topiramate group were paresthesia (n = 46, 28.8%), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 22, 13.8%), and fatigue (n = 19, 11.9%). The most common adverse events in the placebo group were upper respiratory tract infection (n = 20, 12.4%), fatigue (n = 16, 9.9%), and nausea (n = 13, 8.1%). Discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in 18 (10.9%) topiramate subjects and 10 (6.1%) placebo subjects. There were no serious adverse events or deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate treatment at daily doses of approximately 100 mg resulted in statistically significant improvements compared with placebo in mean monthly migraine/migrainous and migraine headache days. Topiramate is safe and generally well tolerated in this group of subjects with chronic migraine, a burdensome condition with important unmet treatment needs. Safety and tolerability of topiramate were consistent with experience in previous clinical trials involving the drug.

Randomized study of tramadol/acetaminophen versus placebo in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) for the management of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Adults with painful DPN involving the lower extremities received 37.5 mg tramadol/325 mg APAP or placebo, up to 1-2 tablets four times daily, for 66 days. Subjects rated average daily pain and sleep interference from 0 ('none') to 10 ('pain as bad as you can imagine' or 'complete interference') every night. Baseline values were recorded for 7 days before starting study medication. The primary endpoint was change in mean of average daily pain scores from baseline to final week. Secondary efficacy outcomes included pain intensity, sleep interference, quality of life, mood, and global impression of change. Potential study limitations included permission to use serotonin reuptake inhibitors concomitantly (except venlafaxine or duloxetine) and the lack of a tramadol-alone or APAP-alone control group. RESULTS: A total of 160 subjects received tramadol/APAP and 153 received placebo. Tramadol/APAP reduced average daily pain significantly compared to placebo from baseline to the final week (-2.71 vs. -1.83, p = 0.001). Tramadol/APAP was associated with significantly greater improvement than placebo (p < or = 0.05) for all measures of pain intensity, sleep interference, and global impression, as well as several measures of quality of life and mood. The only adverse event reported by > 10% of subjects in either the tramadol/APAP or placebo group was nausea (11.9% and 3.3%, respectively). Adverse events resulted in early study discontinuation for 8.1% and 6.5% of subjects in the tramadol/APAP and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Tramadol/APAP was more effective than placebo and was well tolerated in the management of painful DPN.

Tramadol/acetaminophen or hydrocodone/acetaminophen for the treatment of ankle sprain: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This randomized, multicenter study compares the analgesic efficacy and safety of tramadol/acetaminophen versus hydrocodone/acetaminophen versus placebo for the treatment of acute musculoskeletal pain caused by ankle sprain. METHODS: Adults were enrolled with ankle sprain with a diagnosis of partial ligament tear, pain visual analog scale score of 50 to 100 mm (0="no pain," 100="extreme pain"), and pain numeric rating scale score of 2 to 3 (0="none," 3="severe"). Patients reported pain intensity on these scales and pain relief (-1="pain worse," 4="complete relief") hourly for 4 hours after the first dose of tramadol/acetaminophen 75 mg/650 mg, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 7.5 mg/650 mg, or placebo, and daily for 5 days, with as-needed dosing. RESULTS: Tramadol/acetaminophen (n=192) and hydrocodone/acetaminophen (n=204) provided greater total pain relief than placebo (n=207; P<.001) during the first 4 hours (mean scores [95% confidence interval (CI)] 6.6 [95% CI 6.1 to 7.1], 6.8 [95% CI 6.3 to 7.3], and 5.4 [95% CI 4.9 to 5.9], respectively; possible range -4 to 16), decreased pain intensity during the first 4 hours, and increased average pain relief on days 1 to 5. No efficacy measure was significantly different between the tramadol/acetaminophen and hydrocodone/acetaminophen groups. Common adverse events included somnolence, nausea, dizziness, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: One or 2 capsules of 37.5 mg tramadol/325 mg acetaminophen and 1 capsule of 7.5 mg hydrocodone/650 mg acetaminophen were well tolerated, had comparable clinical utility, and were more effective than placebo in the management of acute musculoskeletal pain caused by ankle sprain.

Post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and tolerability study of tramadol extended release for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain in geriatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Once-daily tramadol extended release (ER) was evaluated for 12 weeks in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in 1020 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. As previously reported, compared with placebo, the results of the study showed that patients treated with tramadol ER had significant improvement in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index and in pain-related sleep parameters. OBJECTIVE: Because chronic/persistent arthritis pain is common in geriatric patients, this post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tramadol ER in geriatric patients 65 years or older (n=317) from this study. METHODS: In the original study, the co-primary efficacy variables to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of 100-, 200-, 300-, and 400-mg doses of tramadol ER were the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index subscale scores for pain (0-500) and physical function (0-1700), and patient global assessment of disease (0-100). Secondary efficacy variables included arthritis pain intensity, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, daily pain diaries, sleep parameters, and tolerability assessments. Patients rated their arthritis pain utilizing a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) (0=no pain, 100=extreme pain). Sleep parameters were evaluated based on a 100-mm VAS (0=never, 100=always). RESULTS: A total of 317 patients 65 years or older were included in the analysis (186 women, 131 men). Compared with placebo, this analysis found a significant improvement from baseline to the final visit in the co-primary efficacy variables of pain (least-squares [LS] mean [SE], 108.7 [16.9]; P

Efficacy and tolerability of topiramate 200 mg/d in the prevention of migraine with/without aura in adults: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 12-week pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Several large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have found topiramate (TPM) to be effective and generally well tolerated as a preventive therapy for migraine. OBJECTIVE: This paper evaluates efficacy and safety data from a pilot study of TPM 200 mg/d as preventive therapy in adult subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura. METHODS: The pilot study had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. Subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive TPM 200 mg/d or placebo. The double-blind treatment phase consisted of an 8-week titration period (25 mg/d for the first week, followed by weekly increases of 25 mg) and a 12-week maintenance period. The primary efficacy measure was the change in mean monthly migraine frequency. Additional measures were the median percent reduction in monthly migraine frequency and the proportion of responders (those with > or =50%, > or =75%, or 100% reduction in monthly migraine frequency). RESULTS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 211 subjects (138 TPM, 73 placebo; mean [SD] mean weight, 76.7 [18.7] kg). Of 45 subjects who discontinued the study in the TPM group, 21 discontinued during the titration period, compared with 3 of 13 subjects who discontinued in the placebo group. When the efficacy data were assessed using the per-protocol, analysis-of-covariance model, TPM 200 mg/d was not associated with a significant reduction in mean monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo. A post hoc analysis using a Poisson regression model in the ITT population suggested that TPM significantly reduced mean monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo (P=0.04). A significantly larger proportion of TPM-treated subjects had a > or =75% reduction in monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo (P=0.03). At least 1 adverse event was reported by 90.0% and 69.9% of the TPM and placebo groups, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurring in > or =10% of subjects in the TPM group were paresthesia (45%), dizziness (16%), fatigue (16%), nausea (14%), and weight loss (14%). Most treatment-emergent AEs were rated mild or moderate in severity. Of 3 serious AEs (depression, abdominal pain, leg pain) occurring during the trial, none were considered related to either TPM or placebo. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, mean monthly migraine frequency did not differ significantly between TPM and placebo.

Topiramate for migraine prevention in children: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate for the prevention of pediatric migraine with or without aura in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Treatment options for pediatric migraine are currently limited, and no migraine preventive agents are approved for use in children in the United States. Topiramate is an effective migraine preventive therapy in adults, as demonstrated in several large, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-two children with migraine (age, 6 to 15 years) were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive topiramate (n = 112) or placebo (n = 50). This study was designed to ensure that 150 participants were randomized to study medication. An additional 12 qualified patients were randomized because they had successfully completed the screening phase. The double-blind phase of the trial consisted of a titration period and a maintenance period. Topiramate was initiated at 15 mg/day and titrated over 8 weeks to 2 to 3 mg/kg per day, or maximum tolerated dose, whichever was less (maximum allowed dose was 200 mg/day). The target dose was maintained for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in mean number of migraine days per month (28 days) during the double-blind phase relative to the 4-week prospective baseline phase for each treatment group. RESULTS: Topiramate treatment was associated with a mean reduction over the entire double-blind phase of 2.6 migraine days per month, compared with a mean reduction of 2.0 migraine days per month for placebo (P = .061 topiramate vs. placebo). A significantly greater percentage of topiramate patients (32%) experienced a > or = 75% reduction in mean monthly migraine days compared with placebo (14%, P = .02). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were low: 6.5% for the topiramate group and 4.0% for the placebo group. The adverse events that occurred most commonly in the topiramate group at an incidence rate greater than in the placebo group were: upper respiratory tract infection, anorexia, weight decrease, gastroenteritis, paresthesia, and somnolence. The mean average daily dose of topiramate during the maintenance period was 2.0 mg/kg per day. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that topiramate may be an effective migraine preventive therapy in children. Topiramate was well tolerated in this population. Further randomized studies would be required to definitively establish the efficacy of topiramate for pediatric migraine prevention.

Tramadol/acetaminophen for the treatment of acute migraine pain: findings of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) and placebo for the management of acute migraine pain. BACKGROUND: Tramadol/APAP tablets reduced moderate-to-moderately severe acute pain in controlled studies of other painful conditions. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study enrolled adults with migraine pain as per International Headache Society criteria. Subjects took tramadol/APAP (total dose, 75 mg/650 mg) or placebo for a typical migraine with moderate-to-severe pain. Severity of pain and migraine-related symptoms were recorded before study medication and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 24 hours after study medication. RESULTS: Efficacy analyses included 305 subjects (154 tramadol/APAP and 151 placebo). Treatment response was higher for tramadol/APAP than a placebo at 2 hours after dosing (55.8% vs. 33.8%, P < .001) and at every other assessment from 30 minutes (12.3% vs. 6.6%) through 6 hours (64.9% vs. 37.7%) (all P< or = .022). Subjects in the tramadol/APAP group were more likely than those in the placebo group to be pain-free at 2 hours (22.1% vs. 9.3%), 6 hours (42.9% vs. 25.2%), and 24 hours (52.7% vs. 37.9%) (all P< or = .007). Two hours after dosing, moderate-to-severe symptoms that were less common for tramadol/APAP than placebo included photophobia (34.6% vs. 52.2%, P= .003) and phonophobia (34.3% vs. 44.9%, P = .008), but not migraine-related nausea (38.5% vs. 29.4%, P= .681). Treatment-related adverse events included nausea, dizziness, vomiting, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: Tramadol/APAP reduces the severity of pain, photophobia, and phonophobia associated with migraine headache, but does not reduce migraine-associated nausea. Tramadol/APAP might be an appropriate option for the management of moderate-to-severe migraine headache.

Safety and effectiveness of topiramate for the management of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy in an open-label extension study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to further assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of open-label topiramate therapy in subjects with moderately to severely painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Adults aged 18 to 75 years received open-label topiramate (25-600 mg/d for 26 weeks) in an extension of a previously published randomized, double-blind trial comparing topiramate with placebo. Safety analyses included adverse event (AE) reports and clinical laboratory tests. Metabolic end points included body weight and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)). Effectiveness analyses included a 100-mm pain visual analog (PVA) scale, worst and current pain severity, and sleep disruption. RESULTS: Two hundred five subjects participated in this open-label extension study (118 formerly treated with topiramate and 87 who formerly received placebo). The groups did not differ in baseline demographics or disease characteristics. One hundred twenty-four (60.5%) subjects (68.6% of former topiramate recipients and 49.4% of former placebo recipients) completed the extension study; the most common reason for discontinuation was an AE (27.3% of subjects). AEs among subjects who received > or =1 dose of topiramate (n = 298) included upper respiratory tract infection (16.1%), anorexia (15.1%), diarrhea (12.8%), nausea (12.8%), paresthesia (10.7%), and headache (10.1%). Baseline pain scores were lower in those formerly treated with topiramate (n = 117) than in the former placebo group (n = 86) (PVA: 43.3 vs 52.5, P = 0.014; worst pain: 1.9 vs 2.5, P < 0.001; current pain: 1.6 vs 1.9, P = 0.026; sleep disruption: 3.6 vs 4.6, P = 0.021). At the final visit, PVA, current pain, and sleep disruption scores were not significantly different between the former topiramate and former placebo groups, but worst pain differed significantly (1.4 vs 1.8; P = 0.025). Mean weight loss from the start of topiramate therapy was 5.2 and 5.3 kg in the former topiramate and former placebo groups, respectively (P < 0.001 vs baseline). Mean HbA(1c) values before and after topiramate treatment were 7.7% and 7.4%, respectively, in the former topiramate group (P = 0.004 vs baseline), and 7.6% and 7.1%, respectively, in the former placebo group (P < 0.001 vs baseline). CONCLUSION: Although 39.5% of subjects discontinued, most often due to AEs, the results of this 26-week, open-label extension study with topiramate (up to 600 mg/d) in subjects with moderately to severely painful DPN suggest that pain relief was effective and durable.

Impact of fibromyalgia pain on health-related quality of life before and after treatment with tramadol/acetaminophen.

OBJECTIVE: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain compared with the general population, and to assess the relationship between pain severity and HRQOL before and after treatment with an analgesic. METHODS: Data were obtained from a randomized, double-blind study of patients with moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain. Patients received either tramadol/acetaminophen or placebo 4 times/day as needed for 91 days. HRQOL was measured with the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ). Baseline HRQOL scores were compared with a national sample of noninstitutionalized adults and a sample of patients with impaired HRQOL due to congestive heart failure. Patients with fibromyalgia were divided into tertiles by change in pain severity, and SF-36 scores were compared across the tertiles. Mean changes in SF-36 and FIQ scores were compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: Patients with fibromyalgia scored lower than the US norm on all SF-36 scales (P < 0.0001) and lower than patients with congestive heart failure on most scales. More severe pain was associated with greater impairment of HRQOL compared with less severe pain (P < 0.0001). Patients in the highest tertile for improved pain severity had greater improvement in HRQOL scores than patients in the lower tertiles. Compared with patients who received placebo (n = 157), patients treated with tramadol/acetaminophen (n = 156) showed greater improvement on SF-36 physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, and physical summary scales, as well as FIQ scales for ability to do job, pain, and stiffness (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain significantly impairs HRQOL, and effective pain relief in these patients significantly increases HRQOL.

Tramadol/acetaminophen tablets in the treatment of postsurgical orthopedic pain.

Tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) combination tablets were shown effective and safe for postsurgical orthopedic pain in a 6-day, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled study. Of 305 intent-to-treat (ITT) postsurgical patients, 153 patients undergoing arthroscopy who had at least moderate pain were randomized to receive either tramadol 37.5 mg/APAP 325 mg (mean, 4.3 tablets), or codeine 30 mg/APAP 300 mg (mean, 4.6 tablets), or placebo. Tramadol/APAP was superior to placebo for the following outcome variables: total pain relief (TOTPAR, P = .013), sum of pain intensity differences (SPID, P = .049), sum of total pain relief and sum of pain intensity differences (SPRID, P = .018), and average daily pain relief (P = .031). Similar incidence of adverse events for tramadol/APAP and codeine/APAP was found, except for constipation (0% vs 10.9%) and vomiting (8.2% vs 16.4%).

A double-blind placebo-controlled comparison of tramadol/acetaminophen and tramadol in patients with postoperative dental pain.

The objective of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) (total dose 75 mg/650 mg) and tramadol (total dose 100 mg) for the control of pain after oral surgery. A total of 456 patients with moderate-to-severe pain within 5 h after extraction of two or more third molars were randomized to receive two identical encapsulated tablets containing tramadol/APAP 37.5 mg/325 mg, tramadol 50 mg, or placebo. Tramadol/APAP was superior to tramadol (P < 0.001) or placebo (P < 0.001) on all efficacy measures: total pain relief (PAR) over 6 h (7.4, 2.5, and 1.5, respectively, on a scale of 0-24); sum of pain intensity differences (PIDs) (3.1, 0.6, and 0.1, respectively, on a scale of -6 to 18); and sum of PAR and PID (10.5, 3.1, and 1.6, respectively, on a scale of -6 to 42). Median times to onset of perceptible and meaningful PAR were 37.6 and 126.5 min, respectively, for the tramadol/APAP group (P < 0.001) for each, compared with tramadol and placebo arms). The most common adverse events with active treatment were nausea, dizziness, and vomiting; these events occurred more frequently in the tramadol group than in the tramadol/APAP group. This study established the superiority of tramadol/APAP 75 mg/650 mg over tramadol 100 mg in the treatment of acute pain following oral surgery.

Combination tramadol plus acetaminophen for postsurgical pain.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled trial evaluated tramadol plus acetaminophen (APAP) for orthopedic (n = 153) and abdominal (n = 152) postsurgical pain. METHODS: Patients with moderate pain or greater were randomized to an initial two tablets of 37.5 mg tramadol plus 325 mg APAP (n = 98), codeine 30 mg plus APAP 300 mg (n = 109), or placebo (n = 98); thereafter, they received 1 to 2 tablets every 4 to 6 hours as needed for pain for 6 days. Outcome measures were pain relief and pain intensity, total pain relief, sum of pain intensity differences, and sum of pain relief and pain intensity differences during 4 hours and the daily averages. RESULTS: Tramadol plus APAP was superior to placebo for total pain relief, sum of pain intensity differences, and sum of pain relief and pain intensity differences (P < or =0.015); tramadol plus APAP and codeine plus APAP did not separate (P > or=0.281). For average daily pain relief, average daily pain intensity, and overall medication assessment, tramadol plus APAP was superior to placebo (P < or =0.038); codeine plus APAP did not separate from placebo (P > or =0.125). Discontinuation because of adverse events occurred in 8.2% of tramadol plus APAP, 10.1% of codeine plus APAP, and 3.0% of placebo patients. Except for constipation (4.1% tramadol plus APAP vs 10.1% codeine plus APAP) and vomiting (9.2% vs 14.7%, respectively), adverse events were similar for active treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Tramadol plus APAP (mean dose 4.4 tablets) was effective and well tolerated for postsurgical pain and showed better tolerability than did codeine plus APAP.

Tramadol/acetaminophen combination tablets for the treatment of pain associated with osteoarthritis flare in an elderly patient population.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding tramadol 37.5 mg/acetaminophen (APAP) 325 mg combination tablets (tramadol/APAP) to existing therapy for painful osteoarthritis (OA) flare in a subset of elderly patients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 10-day add-on study. SETTING: Thirty outpatient centers. PARTICIPANTS: Of 308 patients with painful OA flare, a subset of 113 patients aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Average daily pain intensity and pain relief scores for Days 1 through 5 and secondary quality-of-life measures and medication assessments. METHODS: Patients received one or two tramadol/APAP tablets or placebo four times per day for 10 days during ongoing nonselective or cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-selective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy. RESULTS: Tramadol/APAP (n=69) was significantly superior to placebo (n=44) for average daily pain intensity (P=.034) and pain relief (P=.010) for Days 1 through 5 and Days 1 through 10 (P=.012 and P=.019, respectively). Tramadol/APAP had significantly better investigator (P<.001) and patient (P=.001) overall medication assessments and significantly better scores on three of four Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index measures (P< or =.027). Most common adverse events with tramadol/APAP were nausea (18.8%), vomiting (13.0%), dizziness (11.6%), and constipation (4.3%), with an incidence similar to that of the overall study population. Mean daily dose of tramadol/APAP was 4.5 tablets (168 mg/1,458 mg). CONCLUSION: Tramadol/APAP add-on therapy effectively managed painful OA flare in this elderly subset and was generally well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of tramadol/acetaminophen tablets (Ultracet) as add-on therapy for osteoarthritis pain in subjects receiving a COX-2 nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tramadol 37.5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg combination tablets (tramadol/APAP) as add-on therapy for subjects with osteoarthritis (OA) pain inadequately controlled by COX-2 nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID). METHODS: This 91-day, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled subjects with symptomatic OA for >/= 1 year who experienced at least moderate pain [visual analog scale (VAS) score >/= 50/100 mm] despite treatment with stable doses of celecoxib (>/= 200 mg/day) or rofecoxib (>/= 25 mg/day). Tramadol/APAP or matching placebo was titrated to 4 tablets/day on Day 10 and thereafter as needed up to 8 tablets/day. The primary efficacy measure was final VAS score; secondary measures included final pain relief rating scores, subject/investigator overall medication assessments, rate and time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy, and selected quality-of-life/physical functioning scores. RESULTS: Of 307 subjects randomized, 306 taking celecoxib (56.5%) or rofecoxib (43.5%) were included in the intent-to-treat population (n = 153 tramadol/APAP, 153 placebo). Mean final VAS scores for tramadol/APAP plus COX-2 NSAID were significantly lower than placebo plus COX-2 NSAID (41.5 vs 48.3; p = 0.025) and mean final pain relief rating scores were significantly higher (p = 0.002). Subjects taking tramadol/APAP showed significant improvements compared with placebo in subject/investigator medication assessments, as well as in the WOMAC Physical Function and the Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 Role-Physical measures. The most common treatment-related adverse events for tramadol/APAP were somnolence (6.5%), nausea (4.6%), and constipation (3.3%). Mean tramadol/APAP dose was 4.1 tablets (154 mg tramadol/ 1332 mg APAP). CONCLUSION: Tramadol 37.5 mg/APAP 325 mg combination tablets were effective and safe as add-on therapy with COX-2 NSAID for treatment of OA pain.

Tramadol/acetaminophen combination tablets for the treatment of chronic lower back pain: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient study.

BACKGROUND: Tramadol and acetaminophen (APAP) have both shown efficacy in the treatment of lower back pain. The combination of these 2 agents has demonstrated synergistic analgesic action in animal models at specific ratios. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the long-term (3-month) efficacy and safety of tramadol 37.5 mg/APAP 325 mg combination tablets in the treatment of chronic lower back pain. METHODS: Patients with at least moderate lower back pain (pain visual analog [PVA] score >/=40 mm on a 100-mm scale) were randomized to receive up to 8 tablets of tramadol/APAP per day or placebo for 91 days. Medication was titrated from 1 to 4 tablets/d by day 10. The primary efficacy measure was PVA score at the final visit. Secondary measures included scores on the Pain Relief Rating Scale (PRRS), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36); the incidence of discontinuation due to insufficient pain relief (Kaplan-Meier analysis); and overall assessments of medication by the patients and investigators. RESULTS: Three hundred eighteen patients (161 tramadol/APAP, 157 placebo) were included in the intent-to-treat population, defined as all patients who took >/=1 dose of study medication and had >/=1 postrandomization efficacy measurement. The mean age of the study population was 53.9 years, 63.2% were female, 90.3% were white, and the mean baseline PVA score was 70.0 mm. There were no significant differences between groups at baseline. Tramadol/APAP significantly improved final PVA scores (P = 0.015) and final PRRS scores (P < 0.001) compared with placebo. Tramadol/APAP also significantly improved RDQ scores (P

A double-blind, single-dose comparison of the analgesic efficacy of tramadol/acetaminophen combination tablets, hydrocodone/acetaminophen combination tablets, and placebo after oral surgery.

BACKGROUND: Improved clinical outcomes have been documented with combinations of oral analgesic agents, particularly those with complementary activities. However, because not all combinations or dose ratios lead to enhanced analgesia or reduced adverse events (AEs), each combination and dose ratio must be evaluated individually in carefully designed preclinical and clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 37.5 mg tramadol/325 mg acetaminophen tablets (T/APAP), 10 mg hydrocodone bitartrate/650 mg acetaminophen tablets (HC/APAP), and placebo in the treatment of postoperative dental pain. METHODS: This was a single-center, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo- and active-controlled study in adults with at least moderate pain (score > or =50 on a 100-mm pain visual analog scale) after extraction of > or =2 impacted third molars. Patients were randomized to receive 1 or 2 T/APAP tablets, 1 HC/APAP tablet, or placebo. Scores for hourly pain relief (PAR), pain intensity difference (PID), and combined PAR and PID (PRID) were based on reported pain at 30 minutes and each successive hour for 8 hours. Primary efficacy measures were summary pain intensity and pain relief scores (total pain relief [TOTPAR], sum of pain intensity differences [SPID], and sum of pain relief and pain intensity differences [SPRIDI) for 0 to 4 hours, 4 to 8 hours, and 0 to 8 hours. Secondary efficacy measures were hourly PAR, PID, and PRID scores; onset and duration of pain relief; time to remedication with a supplemental analgesic agent; and patients' overall assessment of medication. RESULTS: Two hundred adults took part in the study (50 per treatment group) and were included in the efficacy and safety analyses. T/APAP 75/650 mg and HC/APAP were statistically superior to placebo on the primary efficacy measures of TOTPAR, SPID, and SPRID (P < or = 0.024), as well as on hourly PAR, PID, and PRID over 6 hours (P < or = 0.045). All active treatments were statistically superior to placebo in terms of onset of pain relief (P < or = 0.001), duration of pain relief (P < or = 0.024), time to remedication (P < 0.001), and patients' overall assessment of medication (P < 0.001). A statistically significant dose response with T/APAP (2 tablets > 1 tablet > placebo) was seen for TOTPAR, SPID, and SPRID (all, P < or = 0.018). The median time to onset of pain relief was approximately 34.0 minutes with 2 T/APAP tablets and 25.4 minutes with HC/APAP. Although the median time to onset of pain relief was shorter with HC/APAP, two T/APAP tablets had comparable efficacy to HC/APAP. The median time to remedication with a supplemental analgesic agent was 169.0 minutes in the T/APAP 75/650 mg group and 204.0 minutes in the HC/APAP group. However, the duration of pain relief, as defined by time to remedication, was not significantly different between these 2 groups. The overall incidence of AEs was lower with T/APAP (0% treatment-related AEs) than with HC/APAP (4%) or placebo (10%). The incidence of nausea (18% T/APAP, 36% HC/APAP) and vomiting (12% T/APAP, 30% HC/APAP) was approximately 50% lower with 2 T/APAP tablets than with HC/APAP (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: T/APAP tablets provided effective, rapid (< or = 34 minutes), dose-dependent analgesia for the treatment of postoperative dental pain. Two T/APAP tablets provided analgesia comparable to that provided by HC/APAP with better tolerability.