Safety and efficacy of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron compared with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and overactive bladder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIM: Antimuscarinics and the ß3-adrenoreceptor agonist, mirabegron, are commonly used for treating patients with overactive bladder (OAB) and α1 -adrenoreceptor antagonists (α1 -blockers) are the main pharmacological agents used for treating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). As these conditions commonly occur together, the aim of this systematic review was to identify publications that compared the use of an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron with an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic in men with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. A meta-analysis was subsequently conducted to explore the safety and efficacy of these combinations. METHODS: Included records had to be from a parallel-group, randomized clinical trial that was ≥8 weeks in duration. Participants were male with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. The indirect analyses that were identified compared an α1 -blocker plus OAB agent with an α1 -blocker plus placebo. The PubMed/Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, the Excerpta Medica Database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched for relevant records up until March 5, 2020. Safety outcomes included incidences of overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and urinary retention, postvoid residual volume, and maximum urinary flow (Qmax ). Primary efficacy outcomes were micturitions/day, incontinence episodes/day, and urgency episodes/day, and secondary outcomes were Overactive Bladder Symptom Score and International Prostate Symptom Score. A Bayesian network meta-analysis approach was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1039 records identified, 24 were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic groups in terms of the comparisons identified for all the safety and efficacy analyses conducted. Numerically superior results were frequently observed for the α1 -blocker plus mirabegron group compared with the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group for the safety parameters, including TEAEs, urinary retention, and Qmax . For some of the efficacy parameters, most notably micturitions/day, numerically superior results were noted for the α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic group. Inconsistency in reporting and study variability were noted in the included records, which hindered data interpretation. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that an α1 -blocker plus mirabegron and an α1 -blocker plus antimuscarinic have similar safety and efficacy profiles in male patients with LUTS secondary to BPH and OAB. Patients may, therefore, benefit from the use of either combination within the clinical setting.

Predicting Mirabegron Treatment Response in Patients with Overactive Bladder: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data from Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Many patients discontinue overactive bladder (OAB) treatment because of unmet treatment expectations and/or tolerability issues. OBJECTIVE: To develop a model for predicting the individual treatment response to mirabegron using patient baseline characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a post hoc analysis of data from eight global phase 2/3, double-blind, randomized, placebo- or active-controlled trials of mirabegron in adult patients with OAB. INTERVENTION: Mirabegron 50 mg once-daily monotherapy for ≥12 wk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary efficacy outcomes were the change in the mean number of micturitions and the number of incontinence episodes/24 h after 12 wk of treatment. Secondary efficacy outcomes were the change in the mean number of urgency episodes/24 h and the change in Symptom Bother score after 12 wk of treatment. Baseline demographic characteristics, OAB-related characteristics, and intrinsic and extrinsic factor variables were used to create multivariable linear regression models to predict the primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Data for 3627 patients were included. The predicted effect of mirabegron 50 mg was an average of 2.5 fewer micturition episodes/24 h (95% confidence interval -2.85 to -2.14) and 0.81 fewer incontinence episodes/24 h (95% confidence interval -1.15 to -0.46) from baseline to week 12. A higher number of urgency episodes was predictive of a larger reduction in micturition episodes; body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2, OAB symptoms for ≥12 mo, and incontinence at baseline were predictive of a smaller reduction. Mixed stress/urgency incontinence and more than five urgency episodes per day were predictive of greater reductions in incontinence episodes. Reductions in urgency episodes and Symptom Bother score were also predicted with mirabegron. Limitations include the exclusion of placebo groups from the analysis and the use of clinical trial rather than real-world data. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the predictive models provide new insights into the effects of modifiable factors (such as BMI) and nonmodifiable factors on treatment outcomes with mirabegron 50 mg. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study aimed to identify factors that could predict how patients with overactive bladder respond to mirabegron treatment to help doctors effectively treat this condition. Mirabegron treatment was associated with a lower number of urinations and occurrences of urinary incontinence per day. Factors associated with worse responses to the medication included being obese.

Efficacy and safety of mirabegron in children and adolescents with neurogenic detrusor overactivity: An open-label, phase 3, dose-titration study.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mirabegron in children and adolescents (aged 3 to <18 years) with neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) using clean intermittent catheterization. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, baseline-controlled, Phase III study (NCT02751931), participants received once-daily mirabegron at an adult dose equivalent of 25 mg. Dose was increased to 50 mg equivalent unless there were safety/tolerability concerns. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to Week 24 in maximum cystometric capacity (MCC). Secondary urodynamic assessments, Pediatric Incontinence Questionnaire (PIN-Q), Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S), Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), and Acceptability questionnaires were included. RESULTS: Overall, 86 participants (55 aged 3 to <12 years, 31 aged 12 to <18 years) received treatment; 68 were included in efficacy assessments. A statistically significant increase in MCC from baseline to Week 24 was observed (87.20 ml, 95% confidence interval: 66.07, 108.33; p < .001); this increase was apparent from Week 4. Significant increases in bladder compliance, bladder volume until first detrusor contraction, average volume per catheterization, maximum daytime catheterized volume and number of dry days per week. Significant decreases in detrusor pressure and number of leakage episodes per day were also observed. Significant improvement in PGI-S but not PIN-Q was observed. Most participants reported their condition had either much or very much improved using the CGI-C. Mirabegron was well tolerated in this population with a profile aligned with that in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Mirabegron was effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of pediatric patients with NDO.

What are the additional signs and symptoms in patients with detrusor underactivity and coexisting detrusor overactivity?

AIMS: This study aimed to determine what difference the inclusion of patients with coexisting detrusor overactivity (DO) makes to the signs and symptoms of patients with detrusor underactivity (DU). METHODS: A total of 250 male and 435 female urodynamic tests were analyzed retrospectively. Signs and symptoms which showed a statistically significant difference between DU without DO and DU with DO were identified. RESULTS: Males with DO in addition to DU had higher age and number of daily micturitions, and were more likely to report urgency with or without urgency incontinence than males with DU without DO. They also had lower volumes for first desire to void, volume voided, and post void residual urine, lower abdominal pressure at Qmax and were less likely to report a history of retention or reduced bladder filling sensation than males with DU without DO. Females with DO in addition to DU had higher age and BMI, and were more likely to report urgency incontinence, higher day and night pad usage, constipation and have reduced anal tone than females with DU without DO. They also had lower volumes for first desire to void, volume voided, and post void residual urine, and lower abdominal pressure at Qmax than females who had DU without DO. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in signs and symptoms between patients who have DU without DO, compared to patients having DU with DO. This understanding will help future studies investigating treatment options for DU patients.

Signs and symptoms that distinguish detrusor underactivity from mixed detrusor underactivity and bladder outlet obstruction in male patients.

AIMS: This study aimed to identify signs and symptoms which show differences between men with detrusor underactivity (DU) compared to those with both DU and bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). METHODS: One thousand six hundred and twelve urodynamic tests on male patients were analyzed retrospectively. Signs and symptoms which showed a statistically significant difference between patients with DU alone and patients with both DU+BOO were identified. RESULTS: In the DU only group, considering only patients without a history of bladder outlet surgery, the number of daytime micturitions was lower, maximum voided volume on the bladder diary was higher, and slow stream was reported less often, whereas urinary tract infections were reported more often than for DU+BOO males. The average urine flow rate and abdominal pressure at maximum flow were greater in the DU males, compared to the DU+BOO males. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that by combining symptoms, medical history and signs, that could be measured without the need for invasive urodynamics, it may be possible to identify men with DU in a non-invasive way. By doing so, men with DU could be separated from men with both DU+BOO, with sufficient specificity to allow the use of any new non-surgical treatment modalities, such as new and effective medical therapy.

Tapentadol prolonged-release for moderate-to-severe chronic osteoarthritis knee pain: a double-blind, randomized, placebo- and oxycodone controlled release-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of tapentadol prolonged release (PR) for moderate-to-severe chronic osteoarthritis knee pain. METHODS: Patients (n = 990) were randomized (1:1:1) to tapentadol PR, oxycodone controlled release (CR; reference compound for assay sensitivity), or placebo for a double-blind 3-week titration and 12-week maintenance period. Primary efficacy end-points were change from baseline in average pain intensity at week 12 of maintenance (US end-point) and over the entire maintenance period (non-US end-point) with "last observation carried forward" as imputation method for missing scores. RESULTS: Both primary end-points were not significantly different for tapentadol PR nor for oxycodone CR vs placebo at week 12 (least squares [LS] mean difference = -0.3 [95% CI = -0.61-0.09]; p = 0.152 and 0.2 [95% CI = -0.16-0.54]; p = 0.279, respectively) and over the maintenance period (LS mean difference = -0.2 [95% CI = -0.55-0.07]; p = 0.135 and 0.1 [95% CI = -0.18-0.44]; p = 0.421, respectively). Considerably more patients receiving tapentadol PR than oxycodone CR completed the trial (58.3% vs 36.6%). This is consistent with better results with tapentadol PR on the overall health status (PGIC) compared to oxycodone CR. Indeed, respectively, 56% and 42.5% rated at least "much improved" at the end of treatment. Incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events were higher for both active treatments compared to placebo. Tapentadol PR was associated with a better gastrointestinal tolerability profile with incidences of constipation (17.9% vs 35%) and of the composite of nausea and/or vomiting (23.8% vs 46.8%) significantly lower vs oxycodone CR (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study did not demonstrate assay sensitivity. The finding that both primary end-points for tapentadol PR were not met can, thus, not be interpreted. Tapentadol PR was better tolerated than oxycodone CR, largely due to fewer gastrointestinal side-effects.

Tapentadol prolonged release for managing moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumor-related pain.

BACKGROUND: Tapentadol prolonged release (PR) is effective and well tolerated for chronic osteoarthritis, low back, and diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol PR compared with placebo and morphine controlled release (CR) for managing moderate to severe chronic malignant tumor-related pain. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized-withdrawal, parallel group, active- and placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study (NCT00472303). SETTING: Primary, secondary, and tertiary care settings in 16 countries. METHODS: Eligible patients (pain intensity ≥ 5 [11-point numerical rating scale] on prior analgesics) were randomized (2:1) and titrated to their optimal dose of tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) or morphine sulfate CR (40-100 mg bid) over 2 weeks. Morphine sulfate immediate release 10 mg was permitted as needed for rescue medication (no maximum dose). Patients who completed titration and, during the last 3 days of titration, had mean pain intensity < 5 (based on twice-daily ratings) and mean rescue medication use = 20 mg/day continued into a 4-week maintenance period; patients who received morphine CR during titration continued taking morphine CR, and those who received tapentadol PR were re-randomized (1:1) to tapentadol PR or placebo bid. Response during maintenance (primary efficacy endpoint) was defined as having: (1) completed the maintenance period, (2) a mean pain intensity < 5 during maintenance, and (3) used an average of = 20 mg/day of rescue medication during maintenance. Response at the end of titration was defined similarly, with pain intensity and rescue medication averages based on the last 3 days of titration. RESULTS: Of 622 patients screened, 496 were randomized, treated during titration, and evaluable for safety; 327 were re-randomized, treated during maintenance, and evaluable for safety; and 325 were evaluable for efficacy. The adjusted responder rate estimate during maintenance (logistic regression adjusting for treatment group, pooled center, and pain intensity at start of maintenance) was significantly higher with tapentadol PR (64.3%) than with placebo (47.1%; odds ratio (OR), 2.02 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12 - 3.65]; P = 0.02). Based on responder rates at the end of titration, tapentadol PR (76.0% [174/229]) was non-inferior to morphine CR (83.0% [83/100]). The lower limit of the 95% CI for the between-groups difference (-15.5%) was within the pre-specified 20% non-inferiority margin. During titration, incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 50.0% (169/338) with tapentadol PR and 63.9% (101/158) with morphine CR; incidences of nausea, vomiting, and dry mouth were lower with tapentadol PR than with morphine CR. During maintenance, incidences of TEAEs were 56.3% (63/112), 62.3% (66/106), and 62.4% (68/109) with placebo, tapentadol PR, and morphine CR, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Statistical comparisons between tapentadol PR and morphine CR were limited to descriptive statistics during the maintenance period because of the pre-selection of responders to tapentadol PR or morphine CR during titration. CONCLUSIONS: Results obtained during maintenance indicate that tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) is effective compared with placebo for managing moderate to severe chronic malignant tumor-related pain. Based on results obtained during titration, tapentadol PR provides comparable efficacy to that of morphine sulfate CR (40-100 mg bid), but is associated with better gastrointestinal tolerability.

A pooled analysis of patient-specific factors and efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release treatment for moderate to severe chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate via retrospective analysis the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release (ER; 100-250 mg bid) based on patient-specific factors, including baseline pain intensity, prior opioid experience, gender, and body mass index (BMI). DESIGN: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind phase III studies of similar design that evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol ER for the management of moderate to severe, chronic osteoarthritis knee pain (NCT00421928, NCT00486811) or low back pain (NCT00449176). SETTING: In the original trials, patients were recruited at primary, secondary, and tertiary care centers, institutional settings, and private practices in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. PATIENTS: Data were analyzed separately for groups of patients divided by baseline pain intensity, prior opioid experience, gender, and BMI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received twice-daily placebo, tapentadol ER (100-250 mg), or oxycodone HCl controlled release (CR; 20-50 mg) for a 3-week titration and 12-week maintenance period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes from baseline in average pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) at week 12 of the maintenance period and for the overall maintenance period. RESULTS: Efficacy and tolerability were evaluated in 2,968 and 2,974 patients, respectively. The efficacy of tapentadol ER was shown in subpopulations divided by baseline pain intensity, prior opioid experience, gender, and BMI. Tapentadol ER was also shown to be well tolerated and associated with better gastrointestinal tolerability than oxycodone CR in the evaluated subpopulations (divided by prior opioid experience and gender). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that tapentadol ER (100-250 mg bid) provides similar pain relief and tolerability, regardless of baseline pain intensity, prior opioid experience, gender, or BMI.

Long-term safety and tolerability of tapentadol extended release for the management of chronic low back pain or osteoarthritis pain.

BACKGROUND: Tapentadol is a novel, centrally acting analgesic with 2 mechanisms of action: µ-opioid receptor agonism and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. This randomized, open-label phase 3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00361504) assessed the long-term safety and tolerability of tapentadol extended release (ER) in patients with chronic knee or hip osteoarthritis pain or low back pain. METHODS: Patients were randomized 4:1 to receive controlled, adjustable, oral, twice-daily doses of tapentadol ER (100 to 250 mg) or oxycodone HCl controlled release (CR; 20 to 50 mg) for up to 1 year. Efficacy evaluations included assessments at each study visit of average pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) over the preceding 24 hours. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and discontinuations were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: A total of 1,117 patients received at least 1 dose of study drug. Mean (standard error) pain intensity scores in the tapentadol ER and oxycodone CR groups, respectively, were 7.6 (0.05) and 7.6 (0.11) at baseline and decreased to 4.4 (0.09) and 4.5 (0.17) at endpoint. The overall incidence of TEAEs was 85.7% in the tapentadol ER group and 90.6% in the oxycodone CR group. In the tapentadol ER and oxycodone CR groups, respectively, TEAEs led to discontinuation in 22.1% and 36.8% of patients; gastrointestinal TEAEs led to discontinuation in 8.6% and 21.5% of patients. CONCLUSION: Tapentadol ER (100 to 250 mg bid) was associated with better gastrointestinal tolerability than oxycodone HCl CR (20 to 50 mg bid) and provided sustainable relief of moderate to severe chronic knee or hip osteoarthritis or low back pain for up to 1 year.

Efficacy and safety of Tapentadol extended release compared with oxycodone controlled release for the management of moderate to severe chronic pain related to osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Tapentadol is a novel, centrally acting analgesic with mu-opioid receptor agonist and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor activity. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tapentadol extended release (ER) compared with oxycodone controlled release (CR) for management of moderate to severe chronic osteoarthritis-related knee pain. METHODS: this was a randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, parallel-arm, multicentre, phase III study during which patients received Tapentadol ER, oxycodone CR or placebo for a 3-week titration period followed by a 12-week maintenance period. The study was carried out at sites in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US. A total of 1030 patients with chronic osteoarthritis-related knee pain were randomized to receive Tapentadol ER 100-250 mg twice daily, oxycodone HCl CR 20-50 mg twice daily or placebo. Primary endpoints (as determined prior to initiation of the study) were the changes from baseline in average daily pain intensity (rated by patients on an 11-point numerical rating scale) over the last week of maintenance and over the entire 12-week maintenance period; last observation carried forward was used to impute missing values after early treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: efficacy and safety were evaluated for 1023 patients. Tapentadol ER significantly reduced average pain intensity from baseline to week 12 of the maintenance period versus placebo (least squares mean [LSM] difference [95% CI], -0.7 [-1.04, -0.33]), and throughout the maintenance period (-0.7 [-1.00, -0.33]). Oxycodone CR significantly reduced average pain intensity from baseline throughout the maintenance period versus placebo (LSM difference [95% CI], -0.3 [-0.67, -0.00]) but not at week 12 (-0.3 [-0.68, 0.02]). A significantly higher percentage of patients achieved > or =50% improvement in pain intensity in the Tapentadol ER group (32.0% [110/344]) compared with the placebo group (24.3% [82/337]; p = 0.027), indicating a clinically significant improvement in pain intensity, while a significantly lower percentage of patients achieved > or =50% improvement in pain intensity in the oxycodone CR group (17.3% [59/342]; p = 0.023 vs placebo). In the placebo, Tapentadol ER and oxycodone CR groups, respectively, 61.1% (206/337), 75.9% (261/344) and 87.4% (299/342) of patients reported at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); incidences of gastrointestinal-related TEAEs were 26.1% (88/337), 43.0% (148/344) and 67.3% (230/342). CONCLUSION: treatment with Tapentadol ER 100-250 mg twice daily or oxycodone HCl CR 20-50 mg twice daily was effective for the management of moderate to severe chronic osteoarthritis-related knee pain, with substantially lower incidences of gastrointestinal-related TEAEs associated with treatment with Tapentadol ER than with oxycodone CR.

Efficacy and safety of tapentadol extended release for the management of chronic low back pain: results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled Phase III study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tapentadol extended release (ER) for the management of moderate to severe chronic low back pain. RESEARCH DESIGN: Patients (N = 981) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive tapentadol ER 100 - 250 mg b.i.d., oxycodone HCl controlled release (CR) 20 - 50 mg b.i.d., or placebo over 15 weeks (3-week titration period, 12-week maintenance period). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy was assessed as change from baseline in average pain intensity (11-point NRS) at week 12 of the maintenance period and throughout the maintenance period; last observation carried forward was used to impute missing pain scores. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Tapentadol ER significantly reduced average pain intensity versus placebo at week 12 (least squares mean difference vs placebo [95% confidence interval], -0.8 [-1.22, -0.47]; p < 0.001) and throughout the maintenance period (-0.7 [-1.06,-0.35]; p < 0.001). Oxycodone CR significantly reduced average pain intensity versus placebo at week 12 (-0.9 [-1.24,-0.49]; p < 0.001) and throughout the maintenance period (-0.8 [-1.16,-0.46]; p < 0.001). Tapentadol ER was associated with a lower incidence of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) than oxycodone CR. Gastrointestinal TEAEs, including constipation, nausea, and vomiting, were among the most commonly reported TEAEs (placebo, 26.3%; tapentadol ER, 43.7%; oxycodone CR, 61.9%). The odds of experiencing constipation or the composite of nausea and/or vomiting were significantly lower with tapentadol ER than with oxycodone CR (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tapentadol ER (100 - 250 mg b.i.d.) effectively relieved moderate to severe chronic low back pain over 15 weeks and had better gastrointestinal tolerability than oxycodone HCl CR (20 - 50 mg b.i.d.).

Efficacy and safety of tapentadol prolonged release for chronic osteoarthritis pain and low back pain.

INTRODUCTION: This pooled analysis of data from three phase 3 studies in patients with chronic osteoarthritis knee or low back pain evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol prolonged release (PR; 100-250 mg twice daily) compared with placebo and oxycodone hydrochloride (HCl) controlled release (CR; 20-50 mg twice daily). METHODS: Patients in each study were randomized to receive twice-daily doses of placebo, tapentadol PR (100-250 mg), or oxycodone HCl CR (20-50 mg) for a 12-week maintenance period, preceded by a 3-week titration period. Primary endpoints were change from baseline in average pain intensity (11-point numeric rating scale) at week 12 of the maintenance period and for the overall maintenance period using last observation carried forward for imputation of values missing after treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: A total of 2968 patients were evaluated for efficacy; 2974 patients were evaluated for safety. Compared with placebo, treatment with tapentadol PR or oxycodone CR resulted in significantly greater reductions in pain intensity from baseline at week 12 and for the overall maintenance period (all P<0.001). For both primary endpoints, the efficacy of tapentadol PR was noninferior to oxycodone CR (P<0.001), and tapentadol PR had superior gastrointestinal tolerability compared with oxycodone CR (P<0.001). Results of analyses of responders, patient global impression of change, Short Form-36 domains (except general health), and the EuroQol 5-Dimension health status index were significantly better for tapentadol PR than oxycodone CR (all P

Single dose analgesic efficacy of tapentadol in postsurgical dental pain: the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Tapentadol is a novel, centrally acting analgesic with two modes of action, combining mu-opioid agonism and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition in a single molecule. We compared the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol and a standard dose of morphine with placebo in a model of moderate-to-severe postoperative dental pain. METHODS: Patients undergoing mandibular third molar extraction and experiencing moderate-to-severe pain postsurgery were randomized to receive single, oral doses of tapentadol HCl (25, 50, 75, 100, or 200 mg), morphine sulfate (60 mg), ibuprofen (400 mg; used to establish model sensitivity), or placebo. Mean total pain relief over 8 h (TOTPAR-8) was the primary end point. Secondary end points included mean total pain relief over 4 h (TOTPAR-4) and onset of analgesia. Pairwise comparisons of study drug to placebo were assessed using the Fisher least significant difference test. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: Four hundred patients were randomized to treatment and completed the study. Compared with placebo, mean TOTPAR-8 was significantly greater for tapentadol HCl 50 mg (P = 0.041), 75 mg (P = 0.001), 100 mg (P < 0.001), and 200 mg (P < 0.001); morphine sulfate 60 mg (P < 0.001); and ibuprofen 400 mg (P < 0.001) in a nonparametric analysis of the primary end point. The significantly higher TOTPAR-8 score for ibuprofen compared with placebo established the sensitivity of the model. Mean TOTPAR-4 was higher and onset of action appeared more rapid for tapentadol HCl 200 mg than morphine sulfate 60 mg. Pain relief scores with morphine sulfate 60 mg were between those of tapentadol HCl 100 and 200 mg. The incidence of nausea and vomiting appeared to be lower with all doses of tapentadol HCl compared with morphine sulfate 60 mg, but was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Single oral doses of tapentadol 75 mg or higher effectively reduced moderate-to-severe postoperative dental pain in a dose-related fashion and were well-tolerated relative to morphine. These data suggest that tapentadol is a highly effective, centrally acting analgesic with a favorable side effect profile and rapid onset of action.

The efficacy and tolerability of multiple-dose tapentadol immediate release for the relief of acute pain following orthopedic (bunionectomy) surgery .

OBJECTIVE: Tapentadol is a new, centrally acting analgesic with two mechanisms of action, combining µ-opioid agonism and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition in a single molecule. This study assessed tapentadol immediate release (IR) in patients with postsurgical orthopedic pain. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, phase II study involved patients with moderate-to-severe pain after bunionectomy surgery (first metatarsal with osteotomy). Patients (N = 269) were randomly assigned to receive tapentadol IR 50 or 100 mg, oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg, or placebo; the study drug was taken every 4-6 h, over a 72-h period starting 1 day after surgery (Evaluation Day 2). The primary endpoint was the sum of pain intensity over 24 h (SPI-24) on the second day after randomization (Evaluation Day 3). Potential limitations of this study included the use of rescue medication and the fact that it was not powered to statistically compare between-group differences in tolerability measures. RESULTS: Mean (standard deviation [SD]) SPI-24 values on Evaluation Day 3 were significantly lower for tapentadol IR (50 mg: 33.6 [19.7], p = 0.0133; 100 mg: 29.2 [15.2], p = 0.0001) and oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg (35.7 [17.2]; nominal p = 0.0365) compared with placebo (41.9 [17.7]). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events for all treatment groups were characteristic of drugs with µ-opioid agonist activity. While providing similar analgesic efficacy, tapentadol IR 50 mg was associated with lower rates of nausea (46.3% vs. 71.6% for oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg), dizziness (32.8% vs. 56.7%), vomiting (16.4% vs. 38.8%), and constipation (6.0% vs. 17.9%), and a similar rate of somnolence (28.4% vs. 26.9%) compared with oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Tapentadol IR 50 and 100 mg and oxycodone HCl IR 10 mg were effective in this study for the relief of acute postoperative pain following bunionectomy. The study results suggest improved gastrointestinal tolerability of tapentadol IR 50 mg compared with oxycodone at a dose showing comparable efficacy.

Nasal function in self-reported chemically intolerant individuals.

Nasal function has not yet been investigated under controlled exposures in individuals with self-reported Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (sMCS). Therefore, anterior rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry were applied in 12 individuals with sMCS, and 12 age-matched controls. The sMCS individuals and controls were selected on the basis of a standardized questionnaire. Controlled 4-hr exposures to ethylbenzene and 2-butanone were performed during 4 sessions. Exposures were close to the current German threshold limit values, and they approximated odor thresholds. Subjects with sMCS had a significant decrease in the flow value in anterior rhinomanometry, independent of substance and doses, compared with controls. This result suggests somatic reactions to the exposure. The result must be confirmed in additional studies, and pathophysiological examinations must be performed. For these investigations, anterior rhinomanometry was usable, but acoustic rhinometry can be recommended only after sufficient standardization has occurred. Furthermore, biochemical parameters of nasal mucosa must be considered.