Oral Prolonged-Release Oxycodone/Naloxone for Managing Pain and Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Review of the Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Opioids provide effective relief from moderate-to-severe pain and should be prescribed as part of a multifaceted approach to pain management when other treatments have failed. Fixed-dose oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets (OXN PR) were designed to address the opioid class effect of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) by combining the analgesic efficacy of oxycodone with the opioid receptor antagonist, naloxone, which has negligible systemic availability when administered orally. This formulation has abuse-deterrent properties, since systemic exposure to naloxone by parenteral administration would antagonize the euphoric effects of oxycodone. METHODS: A literature search was conducted to assess the evidence base for OXN PR to treat moderate-to-severe pain and its impact on bowel function, based on published clinical trials and observational studies. RESULTS: Extensive data demonstrate that OXN PR provides effective analgesia and clinically relevant improvements in bowel function in patients with OIC and moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain and noncancer pain types such as low back pain, neuropathic pain, and musculoskeletal pain. OXN PR has also been found to improve bowel function in patients with OIC refractory to multiple types of laxatives, and improve Parkinson's disease-related pain. No unanticipated safety concerns have been reported in elderly patients. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from clinical trials and observational studies confirms that for selected patients OXN PR significantly improves moderate-to-severe chronic pain and provides relief from OIC. Treatment should be tailored to individual patients to establish the lowest effective dose. An absence of analgesic ceiling effect was seen across the clinically relevant dose range investigated (≤ 160/80 mg/day).

Constipation in adults.

INTRODUCTION: Although there are defined criteria for the diagnosis of constipation, in practice, diagnostic criteria are less rigid, and depend in part on the perception of normal bowel habit. Constipation is highly prevalent, with approximately 12 million general practitioner prescriptions for laxatives in England in 2001. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of non-drug interventions, bulk-forming laxatives, faecal softeners, stimulant laxatives, osmotic laxatives, prostaglandin derivatives, and 5-HT4 agonists in adults with idiopathic chronic constipation? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to October 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). RESULTS: We found 51systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: arachis oil, biofeedback, bisacodyl, cascara, docusate, exercise, glycerol/glycerine suppositories, high-fibre diet, increasing fluids, ispaghula husk, lactitol, lactulose, lubiprostone, macrogols (polyethylene glycols), magnesium salts, methylcellulose, paraffin, phosphate enemas, seed oils, senna, sodium citrate enemas, prucalopride, and sterculia.