Reductions in All-Cause Mortality Associated with the Use of Methylnaltrexone for Opioid-Induced Bowel Disorders: A Pooled Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that activation of the µ-opioid receptor may reduce overall survival and increase the risk for all-cause mortality in patients with cancer and noncancer pain. Methylnaltrexone, a selective, peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, has demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. This retrospective analysis of 12 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of methylnaltrexone evaluated the treatment of opioid-induced bowel disorders in patients with advanced illness or noncancer pain. METHODS: The risk of all-cause mortality within 30 days after the last dose of study medication during the double-blind phase was compared between methylnaltrexone and placebo groups. The data were further stratified by cancer vs noncancer, age, gender, and acute vs chronic diagnoses. RESULTS: Pooled data included 2,526 methylnaltrexone-treated patients of which 33 died, and 1,192 placebo-treated patients of which 35 died. The mortality rate was 17.8 deaths/100 person-years of exposure in the methylnaltrexone group and 49.5 deaths/100 person-years of exposure for the placebo group. The all-cause mortality risk was significantly lower among patients receiving methylnaltrexone compared with placebo (hazard ratio: 0.399, 95% confidence interval: 0.25, 0.64; P = .0002), corresponding to a 60% risk reduction. Significant risk reductions were observed for those receiving methylnaltrexone who had cancer or chronic diagnoses. Methylnaltrexone-treated patients had a significantly reduced mortality risk compared with placebo regardless of age or gender. CONCLUSIONS: Methylnaltrexone reduced all-cause mortality vs placebo treatment across multiple trials, suggesting methylnaltrexone may confer survival benefits in patients with opioid-induced bowel disorders taking opioids for cancer-related or chronic noncancer pain.

Naldemedine Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in the COMPOSE Phase 3 Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid-induced constipation is among the most common side effects associated with opioid use in patients with chronic non-cancer pain, and it can have a significant negative impact on health-related quality of life (QOL). This analysis evaluated the effect of naldemedine 0.2 mg on patient-reported outcomes in three phase 3 clinical studies. METHODS: COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2 were identical randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of 12 weeks' duration, allowing data to be integrated (n=1095). COMPOSE-3 was similar in design, but of 52 weeks' duration (n=1241). Patients were adults with chronic non-cancer pain who had been treated with opioid analgesics for ≥3 months and experiencing opioid-induced constipation. Patient-reported outcomes included Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM; 12 questions assessed on a 5-point Likert scale), PAC-QOL (28 questions assessed on a 5-point Likert scale), and Subject Global Satisfaction (measured on a 7-point Likert scale). The proportion of patients achieving a ≥1.5 improvement in PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL was calculated. The correlation between change in PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL scores and frequency of bowel movements was also explored. RESULTS: The proportion of PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL responders was significantly higher for naldemedine than for placebo at all assessed time points in COMPOSE-1/COMPOSE-2 (p<0.005 for both) and COMPOSE-3 (p<0.005 and p<0.0001, respectively). There was a statistically significant correlation between improvement in PAC-SYM/PAC-QOL and frequency of bowel movements at all time points (p≤0.0002). The majority of patients treated with naldemedine reported markedly or moderately improved satisfaction with constipation and abdominal symptoms on the Subject Global Satisfaction questionnaire. DISCUSSION: Naldemedine treatment was associated with a rapid and sustained clinically relevant improvement in patient-reported outcomes, indicating improvement in opioid-induced constipation-related symptoms and QOL. CLINICALTRIALSGOV REGISTRATION: NCT01965158, NCT01993940, NCT01965652.

A Renal Impairment Subgroup Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Naldemedine for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy.

PURPOSE: Naldemedine, an oral, peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC), is renally excreted. This subgroup analysis integrated data from 3 Phase 3 trials (COMPOSE-1, COMPOSE-2, COMPOSE-3) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of naldemedine in patients with renal impairment (RI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients age 18-80 years with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and OIC received oral naldemedine 0.2 mg or placebo once daily. RI subgroups consisted of patients with normal function (baseline glomerular filtration rate ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2), mild (≥60 to <90 mL/min/1.73 m2), and moderate (≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) RI. Safety assessments based on ≤12 weeks of treatment from all 3 studies included incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was based on the proportion of responders in COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2 only, defined as ≥3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs)/week and a ≥1-SBM/week increase from baseline for ≥9 of 12 weeks and ≥3 of the last 4 weeks. RESULTS: In total, 2328 patients were included in this analysis. The incidence of TEAEs was similar in the naldemedine and placebo groups (overall, 47.1% vs 45.6%; normal, 44.6% vs 43.6%; mild RI, 49.0% vs 44.7%; moderate RI, 46.6% vs 55.9%). GI-related TEAEs occurred more frequently in the naldemedine group versus placebo (overall, 21.8% vs 13.8%; normal, 21.6% vs 12.5%; mild RI, 22.6% vs 14.7%; moderate RI, 18.0% vs 14.2%). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the naldemedine 0.2 mg group were responders versus the placebo group (overall, 50.1% vs 34.1%, P<0.0001; normal, 52.0% vs 39.3%; mild RI, 48.3% vs 30.3%; moderate RI, 52.5% vs 31.7%). CONCLUSION: This integrated analysis confirmed that OIC treatment with naldemedine 0.2 mg was generally well tolerated and effective in patients with CNCP and mild or moderate RI. Safety and efficacy results were consistent with the overall population. CLINICALTRIALSGOV REGISTRATION: COMPOSE-1: NCT01965158; COMPOSE-2: NCT01993940; COMPOSE-3: NCT01965652.

Safety and Efficacy of Naldemedine for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy: A Subgroup Analysis of Patients ≥ 65 Years of Age.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC), the most common side effect of opioid treatment, is under-recognized and undertreated in older patients. Naldemedine, an oral, peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist (PAMORA), is approved in Japan, the United States, and the European Union for treatment of OIC in adult patients. OBJECTIVE: This integrated analysis of three phase 3 trials (COMPOSE-1, COMPOSE-2, and COMPOSE-3) evaluated the safety and efficacy of naldemedine for up to 12 weeks in a subgroup of patients aged ≥ 65 years. METHODS: Patients aged 18-80 years with chronic non-cancer pain for ≥ 3 months (treated with opioids for ≥ 3 months in COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2) and OIC received oral naldemedine 0.2 mg or placebo once daily. Safety assessments included overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), TEAEs in the gastrointestinal disorders System Organ Class, and TEAEs of opioid withdrawal or possible opioid withdrawal. Efficacy was based on the proportion of responders in COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2, defined as having ≥ 3 spontaneous bowel movements/week and a ≥ 1-spontaneous bowel movement/week increase from baseline for ≥ 9 of 12 weeks and ≥ 3 of the last 4 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 14.8% (344/2328) of patients were aged ≥ 65 years in all studies. The incidence of TEAEs in naldemedine-treated patients aged ≥ 65 years (45.9%) was comparable to that in patients aged ≥ 65 years receiving placebo (51.6%) and in the overall naldemedine group (47.1%). The incidence of gastrointestinal disorders System Organ Class TEAEs in naldemedine-treated patients aged ≥ 65 years (20.2%) was also comparable to that in patients aged ≥ 65 years receiving placebo (16.1%) and in the overall naldemedine group (21.8%). The incidence of TEAEs of opioid withdrawal with naldemedine was 1.1% in patients aged ≥ 65 years and 1.0% overall, and the incidence of TEAEs of possible opioid withdrawal was 1.1% in patients aged ≥ 65 years and 1.7% overall. The proportion of responders was higher in naldemedine-treated patients versus placebo, both overall (50.1% vs 34.1%; p < 0.0001) and in those aged ≥ 65 years (51.8% vs 37.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This integrated analysis confirmed that OIC treatment with naldemedine 0.2 mg was generally well tolerated and effective in patients aged ≥ 65 years with chronic non-cancer pain. Safety and efficacy results were consistent with the overall patient population. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT01965158, NCT01993940, NCT01965652.

Real-world misuse, abuse, and dependence of abuse-deterrent versus non-abuse-deterrent extended-release morphine in Medicaid non-cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Opioids with abuse-deterrent properties may reduce widespread abuse, misuse, and diversion of these products. This study aimed to quantify misuse, abuse, dependence, and health resource use of extended-release morphine sulfate with sequestered naltrexone hydrochloride (ER-MSN; EMBEDA®), compared with non-abuse-deterrent extended-release morphine (ERM) products in Medicaid non-cancer patients. METHODS: Administrative medical and pharmacy claims data were analyzed for 10 Medicaid states from 1 January 2015, to 30 June 2016. Patients were included if they received a prescription for ER-MSN or any oral, non-abuse-deterrent ERM. Index date was the date of first prescription for an ER-MSN or ERM. Abuse/dependence, non-fatal overdose, emergency department (ED) visits, and ED/inpatient readmissions were determined for each participant. An overall measure of misuse and abuse was also calculated. To account for differences in follow-up, all counts are expressed per 100 patient-years. RESULTS: There were 4,857 patients who received ER-MSN and 10,357 who received an ERM. The average age in the two cohorts was approximately 45 years old. From pre-index to follow-up, the number of patients per 100 patient-years with a diagnosis code indicating abuse or dependence increased by 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85, 0.97) in the ER-MSN cohort and 2.23 (95% CI: 2.14, 2.32) in the ERM cohort. The number of patients per 100 patient-years with an opioid-related non-fatal overdose increased by 0.05 (95% CI: 0.04, 0.06) in the ER-MSN cohort compared with 0.11 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.13) in the ERM cohort. The opioid abuse overall composite score increased by 1.36 (95% CI: 1.24, 1.48) in the post-index period in the ER-MSN cohort compared to 3.21 (95% CI: 3.10, 3.32) in the ERM cohort. CONCLUSION: Misuse, abuse, and dependence events were numerically lower in patients receiving ER-MSN compared with those receiving ERM products.

The 9th Santorini Conference: Systems Medicine, Personalised Health and Therapy. "The Odyssey from Hope to Practice", Santorini, Greece, 30 September⁻3 October 2018.

The 9th traditional biannual conference on Systems Medicine, Personalised Health & Therapy-"The Odyssey from Hope to Practice", inspired by the Greek mythology, was a call to search for practical solutions in cardio-metabolic diseases and cancer, to resolve and overcome the obstacles in modern medicine by creating more interactions among disciplines, as well as between academic and industrial research, directed towards an effective 'roadmap' for personalised health and therapy. The 9th Santorini Conference, under the Presidency of Sofia Siest, the director of the INSERM U1122; IGE-PCV (www.u1122.inserm.fr), University of Lorraine, France, offered a rich and innovative scientific program. It gathered 34 worldwide distinguished speakers, who shared their passion for personalised medicine with 160 attendees in nine specific sessions on the following topics: First day: The Odyssey from hope to practice: Personalised medicine-landmarks and challenges Second day: Diseases to therapeutics-genotype to phenotype an "-OMICS" approach: focus on personalised therapy and precision medicine Third day: Gene-environment interactions and pharmacovigilance: a pharmacogenetics approach for deciphering disease "bench to clinic to reality" Fourth day: Pharmacogenomics to drug discovery: a big data approach and focus on clinical data and clinical practice. In this article we present the topics shared among the participants of the conference and we highlight the key messages.

Opioid-sparing Effects of SoluMatrix Indomethacin in a Phase 3 Study in Patients With Acute Postoperative Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To report the opioid-sparing effects of SoluMatrix indomethacin, developed using SoluMatrix Fine Particle Technology, in a phase 3 study in patients with acute pain following bunionectomy. METHODS: This phase 3, placebo-controlled study randomized 462 patients with moderate-to-severe pain following bunionectomy surgery to receive SoluMatrix indomethacin 40 mg 3 times daily, SoluMatrix indomethacin 40 mg twice daily, SoluMatrix indomethacin 20 mg 3 times daily, celecoxib 400-mg loading dose followed by 200 mg twice daily, or placebo. Patients were permitted to receive opioid-containing rescue medication throughout the study. The proportion of patients who used rescue medication and the amount of rescue medication used on the first (0 to 24 h) and second (>24 to 48 h) days following initial dose of study medication, as well as time to first rescue medication use, were assessed. RESULTS: Significantly fewer patients who received SoluMatrix indomethacin 40 or 20 mg 3 times daily used opioid-containing rescue medication on day 1 compared with those receiving placebo (P≤0.034), and fewer patients in all active treatment groups used rescue medication during the second day compared with those in the placebo group (P<0.001). All active treatment groups used significantly fewer rescue medication tablets on days 1 and 2 following randomization compared with placebo (P<0.001). The most common adverse events were nausea, postprocedural edema, and headache. DISCUSSION: SoluMatrix indomethacin was associated with opioid-sparing effects in patients with acute postoperative pain.

Treatment Options for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients With Refractory Chronic Pain: An Evidence Based Approach.

STUDY DESIGN: A significant number of lumbar postsurgical patients continue to suffer persistent pain and limited function and are termed to have "Failed back surgery syndrome" (FBSS). This review evaluates clinical trial data for the treatment of FBSS patients. OBJECTIVE: Using an evidence-based approach to evaluate FBSS treatments will assist clinicians in choosing the most effective options for FBSS patients. Furthermore, reducing the utilization of less effective therapies may result in substantial financial savings for this patient population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Treatments for FBSS may be generally categorized as physical therapy and exercise, medications, interventional procedures, neuromodulation, and reoperation. Careful review and classification of the level of evidence available for each category of treatment for FBSS patients will help guide clinical decision-making. METHODS: A literature review was performed for FBSS treatments. The publications were arranged hierarchically according to the North American Spine Society's guidelines as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies, retrospective chart, and systematic reviews. Book chapters, nonsystematic reviews, and expert opinions were excluded. The review focused on studies with at least 20 FBSS patients and 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Evidence is weak for medications and reoperation, but strong for active exercise and interventional procedures such as adhesiolysis. The strongest evidence for long-term treatment is for spinal cord stimulation (SCS), showing favorable Level I RCT results compared with conventional medical management and reoperation. In addition, high-frequency SCS at 10 kHz has demonstrated superiority over traditional, low-frequency SCS for treating low back and leg pain in a recent Level I RCT. CONCLUSION: Clinicians may increasingly utilize levels of evidence during their evaluation of each FBSS patient to render the best therapeutic plan, likely resulting in improved long-term pain control and reducing costs by avoiding less effective modalities. New directions in SCS show promising results for the treatment of FBSS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Chronic Pain and the Opioid Conundrum.

Opioids prescribed for chronic cancer and noncancer pain have been embroiled in public policy debates as to effectiveness and potential for contributing to society's problem with misuse, addiction, and overdose mortality. The conundrum of opioid prescribing is to determine who will most likely benefit from opioids and how medical practitioners may safely provide chronic opioid therapy, while also identifying patients who are unlikely to benefit or could divert illicit pharmaceuticals into society. Risk assessment and monitoring are essential to meet the standard of care, as is compliance with federal controlled substances law as well as state regulations.

An Online Survey of Patients' Experiences Since the Rescheduling of Hydrocodone: The First 100 Days.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an Internet patient survey through the National Fibromyalgia & Chronic Pain Association on reactions to the first 100 days following the rescheduling of hydrocodone. METHODS: Face-valid survey questions were created with expert consensus along with repurposed questions used on previous NFMCPA surveys covering domains such as demographics and symptoms. The questionnaire was designed to be administered over the Internet. RESULTS: 6,420 responders met screening criteria and completed the survey. Most (5,181, or 82.5%) had been prescribed hydrocodone for more than 1 year. 2,296, (39.0%) reported no changes in access to hydrocodone, while the majority experienced some barriers. Of those who could no longer get hydrocodone, 1,067 (18.1%) borrowed pain medications, 1,007 (17.1%) turned to marijuana, 773 (13.1%) used alcohol, and 135 (2.3%) used illicit drugs. Most respondents had to visit their healthcare providers more often (N = 3,699, 64.2%) and 1,735 (30.3%) reported some type of issue interacting with their pharmacy. Most felt that the rescheduling was neither a fair nor appropriate solution to the abuse of hydrocodone (N = 4,938, 88.3%). For those still working, 801 (46.2%) reported that they had missed work because of the stricter regulations. 1,462 (27.2%) reported having thoughts of suicide since the rescheduling. SIGNIFICANCE: The unintended consequences for people with chronic pain that have been caused by the rescheduling effort to impede hydrocodone abuse are negatively impacting thousands. These consequences include suffering from being placed on less effective drugs, increased cost, inconvenience, and negative influence on physician-patient and pharmacist-patient relationships.

A randomized, phase 2 study investigating TRV130, a biased ligand of the µ-opioid receptor, for the intravenous treatment of acute pain.

Efficacy of conventional opioids can be limited by adverse events (AEs). TRV130 is a structurally novel biased ligand of the µ-opioid receptor that activates G protein signaling with little ß-arrestin recruitment. In this phase 2, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled study, we investigated the efficacy and tolerability of TRV130 in acute pain after bunionectomy. We used an adaptive study design in which 144 patients experiencing moderate-to-severe acute pain after bunionectomy were randomized to receive double-blind TRV130, placebo, or morphine in a pilot phase. After pilot phase analysis, 195 patients were randomized to receive double-dummy TRV130 0.5, 1, 2, or 3 mg every 3 hours (q3h); placebo; or morphine 4 mg q4h intravenously. The primary end point was the time-weighted average change in numeric rating scale pain intensity over the 48-hour treatment period. Secondary end points included stopwatch and categorical assessments of pain relief. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. TRV130 2 and 3 mg q3h, and morphine 4 mg q4h produced statistically greater mean reductions in pain intensity than placebo over 48 hours (P < 0.005). TRV130 at 2 and 3 mg produced significantly greater categorical pain relief than morphine (P < 0.005) after the first dose, with meaningful pain relief occurring in under 5 minutes. TRV130 produced no serious AEs, with tolerability similar to morphine. These results demonstrate that TRV130 rapidly produces profound analgesia in moderate-to-severe acute pain, suggesting that G-protein-biased µ-opioid receptor activation is a promising target for development of novel analgesics.

The Relationship Between the Mechanisms of Action and Safety Profiles of Intrathecal Morphine and Ziconotide: A Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: To better characterize safety profiles associated with the intrathecal (IT) administration of morphine and ziconotide and discuss how they relate to mechanisms of action. METHODS: Published data were evaluated to identify potential relationships between safety profiles of IT morphine and IT ziconotide and their mechanisms of action. RESULTS: Potentially severe and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs) associated with IT morphine include respiratory depression, tolerance, and granuloma formulation, whereas IT ziconotide is associated with neuropsychiatric AEs, such as cognitive impairment, hallucinations, and changes in mood or consciousness, particularly with high doses and rapid titration. AEs associated with these IT therapies may result from spread of the medication out of the IT space into areas of the central and peripheral nervous systems and systemic circulation. AEs that occur usually can be managed and, in some cases, prevented. To mitigate risk, patients' histories should be reviewed to identify potential complicating factors (e.g., obesity or other risk factors for respiratory dysfunction in patients receiving IT morphine; a history of psychosis in patients receiving IT ziconotide). Also, treatment should be initiated at a low dose, titrated slowly, and patients should be closely monitored during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: IT morphine and IT ziconotide are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for patients who do not respond to less invasive treatments, but the safety profiles of each may make them more or less appropriate for certain patient populations.

Acute pain: effective management requires comprehensive assessment.

Pain is among the most common reasons that patients seek medical care, and inadequate assessment may result in suboptimal management. Acute pain in response to trauma or surgery can be complex, variable, and dynamic, but its assessment is often simplistic and brief. One-dimensional rating scale measures of pain severity facilitate rapid evaluation and often form the basis of treatment algorithms. However, additional features of pain should inform the selection of a treatment regimen, and can include pain qualities, duration, impact on functional capabilities, and underlying cause. Patient age, sex, psychosocial features, and comorbid conditions are also important features to consider. Use of a multidimensional tool is recommended for assessing many of these features if time permits. Additionally, clinicians often fail to recognize or consider the potentially detrimental long-term effects of acute pain. As the United States continues to experience a prescription drug crisis, a "universal precautions" approach including abuse risk assessment and abuse deterrence strategies should be implemented for patients receiving opioids. Increased efforts and research are necessary to enhance the utility of available acute pain assessment tools. Developing more comprehensive tools for patient assessment is the first step in achieving the ultimate goal of effective acute pain management. The objectives of this review are to summarize issues regarding the complexity of acute pain and to provide suggestions for its evaluation.

Inhibition of insulin receptor function by a human, allosteric monoclonal antibody: a potential new approach for the treatment of hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia.

Novel therapies are needed for the treatment of hypoglycemia resulting from both endogenous and exogenous hyperinsulinema. To provide a potential new treatment option, we identified XMetD, an allosteric monoclonal antibody to the insulin receptor (INSR) that was isolated from a human antibody phage display library. To selectively obtain antibodies directed at allosteric sites, panning of the phage display library was conducted using the insulin-INSR complex. Studies indicated that XMetD bound to the INSR with nanomolar affinity. Addition of insulin reduced the affinity of XMetD to the INSR by 3-fold, and XMetD reduced the affinity of the INSR for insulin 3-fold. In addition to inhibiting INSR binding, XMetD also inhibited insulin-induced INSR signaling by 20- to 100-fold. These signaling functions included INSR autophosphorylation, Akt activation and glucose transport. These data indicated that XMetD was an allosteric antagonist of the INSR because, in addition to inhibiting the INSR via modulation of binding affinity, it also inhibited the INSR via modulation of signaling efficacy. Intraperitoneal injection of XMetD at 10 mg/kg twice weekly into normal mice induced insulin resistance. When sustained-release insulin implants were placed into normal mice, they developed fasting hypoglycemia in the range of 50 mg/dl. This hypoglycemia was reversed by XMetD treatment. These studies demonstrate that allosteric monoclonal antibodies, such as XMetD, can antagonize INSR signaling both in vitro and in vivo. They also suggest that this class of allosteric monoclonal antibodies has the potential to treat hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia resulting from conditions such as insulinoma, congenital hyperinsulinism and insulin overdose.

Intrathecal gabapentin to treat chronic intractable noncancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Oral gabapentin is approved as an anticonvulsant medication and to treat postherpetic neuralgia. Its nonopioid properties and presumed spinal site of analgesic action made the study on intrathecal gabapentin attractive to establish the minimum effective dose for a later, pivotal trial. METHODS: The authors examined the safety and efficacy of intrathecal gabapentin in a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial in a heterogeneous cohort of candidates with chronic pain for intrathecal drug therapy. RESULTS: Patients (N = 170) were randomized to receive continuous intrathecal gabapentin (0 [placebo], 1, 6, or 30 mg/day) during 22 days of blinded treatment after implantation of a permanent drug delivery system. The highest dose, 30 mg/day, was selected to maintain a safety margin below the 100-mg/day dose that was explored in a phase 1 study. The authors found no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome measure, which was the numerical pain rating scale and response rate after 3 weeks, for any dose versus placebo. Physical functioning, quality of life, and emotional functioning also revealed no differences. Small, nonsignificant changes occurred in opioid medication use. The most frequent device-related adverse events were transient postimplant (lumbar puncture) headache, pain, and nausea. The most frequent gabapentin-related adverse events were nausea, somnolence, headache, dizziness, fatigue, and peripheral edema. CONCLUSION: Twenty-two days of intrathecal gabapentin did not demonstrate statistically significant or clinically meaningful analgesic effects. The study sponsor has no current plans for further studies. Drug-related adverse events were similar to those for oral gabapentin. Most device-related adverse events resulted from the implant surgery or anesthesia.

Fentanyl buccal tablet compared with immediate-release oxycodone for the management of breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients with chronic cancer and noncancer pain: a randomized, double-blind, crossover study followed by a 12-week open-label phase to evaluate patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate analgesic efficacy, functional benefit, and patient satisfaction with fentanyl buccal tablet vs immediate-release oxycodone for breakthrough pain (BTP). DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled crossover trial and 12-week open-label extension. SETTING: Forty-two U.S. sites. PATIENTS: Opioid-tolerant patients with predominantly chronic noncancer pain experiencing BTP. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to open-label titration periods with fentanyl buccal tablet followed by oxycodone or vice versa for BTP management. After titrating to a successful dose of both medications (single dose providing adequate analgesia without unacceptable adverse events), patients were re-randomized to treat 10 BTP episodes with one medication and 10 with the other. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy measure was pain intensity (PI) difference 15 minutes postdose. Secondary measures included PI difference 5, 10, 30, 45, and 60 minutes postdose; sum of PI differences 30 and 60 minutes postdose; ≥33% and ≥50% reduction in PI; and pain relief. Questionnaires assessed functional status/satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 213 patients enrolled, 149 achieved a successful dose of both medications; 131 completed the double-blind phase and 112 the open-label phase. PI difference at 15 minutes (mean [standard deviation]) was greater with fentanyl buccal tablet (0.88 [1.20]) vs oxycodone (0.76 [1.13]; P < 0.001). Patients preferred fentanyl buccal tablet (47%) over oxycodone (35%); 18% had no preference. Patients and clinicians reported consistently better functional improvement and satisfaction with fentanyl buccal tablet vs short-acting opioids (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Fentanyl buccal tablet was associated with rapid onset of analgesia and improvements in functional status and patient satisfaction compared with immediate-release oxycodone.

Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of AZD1940, a novel cannabinoid agonist, on post-operative pain after lower third molar surgical removal.

Aim To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of AZD1940, a novel peripherally acting cannabinoid CB1/CB2 receptor agonist, in patients undergoing third molar surgical removal. Methods This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients scheduled for surgical removal of an impacted lower third molar. Patients received a single oral dose of 800 µg AZD1940, 500 mg naproxen or placebo 1.5 h before surgery. The dose of 800 µg AZD1940 was selected based on earlier data from a single dose study in man, in which it was identified as the highest well tolerated dose. Ongoing post-operative pain (primary variable) and pain on jaw movement were assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS, 0-100 mm) from 0 to 8h postoperatively, deriving the area under the curve of ongoing pain (VAS AUC0-8h), and of pain on jaw movement (VASJM AUC0-8h). The time to requesting rescue medication (acetaminophen) was recorded. Subjective cannabinoid effects were assessed by the visual analog mood scale (VAMS). Results In total, 151 patients were randomized to AZD1940 (n = 61), placebo (n = 59) or naproxen (n = 31). There was no statistically significant difference in pain VAS AUC0-8h or in VASJM AUC0-8h between AZD1940 and placebo. Naproxen significantly reduced both pain VAS AUC0-8h and VASJM AUC0-8h as compared with placebo (p < 0.0001 for both). Significantly fewer patients on naproxen requested rescue medication and the duration of time to rescue was greater, as compared with placebo, whereas there were no significant differences between AZD1940 and placebo in these outcome variables. Statistically significant increases in VAMS items "sedated" and "high" were observed after AZD1940 compared with placebo. The increases in VAMS were numerically small compared with previous findings with a centrally acting cannabinoid. The most commonly observed adverse events (AE) on treatment with AZD1940 were postural dizziness (80% of subjects), nausea (26%), hypotension (21%) and headache (13%), most AE being mild to moderate. Conclusion The CB1/CB2 receptor agonist AZD1940 did not reduce post-operative pain after lower third molar surgical removal at doses exerting subjective cannabinoid effects. Implications Activation of peripheral CB1/CB2 receptors per se is probably of less clinical relevance for the treatment of acute nociceptive pain in man.

A fully human, allosteric monoclonal antibody that activates the insulin receptor and improves glycemic control.

Many patients with diabetes mellitus (both type 1 and type 2) require therapy to maintain normal fasting glucose levels. To develop a novel treatment for these individuals, we used phage display technology to target the insulin receptor (INSR) complexed with insulin and identified a high affinity, allosteric, human monoclonal antibody, XMetA, which mimicked the glucoregulatory, but not the mitogenic, actions of insulin. Biophysical studies with cultured cells expressing human INSR demonstrated that XMetA acted allosterically and did not compete with insulin for binding to its receptor. XMetA was found to function as a specific partial agonist of INSR, eliciting tyrosine phosphorylation of INSR but not the IGF-IR. Although this antibody activated metabolic signaling, leading to enhanced glucose uptake, it neither activated Erk nor induced proliferation of cancer cells. In an insulin resistant, insulinopenic model of diabetes, XMetA markedly reduced elevated fasting blood glucose and normalized glucose tolerance. After 6 weeks, significant improvements in HbA(1c), dyslipidemia, and other manifestations of diabetes were observed. It is noteworthy that hypoglycemia and weight gain were not observed during these studies. These studies indicate, therefore, that allosteric monoclonal antibodies have the potential to be novel, ultra-long acting, agents for the regulation of hyperglycemia in diabetes.

A review of forensic implications of opioid prescribing with examples from malpractice cases involving opioid-related overdose.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a forensic overview and trace common threads among malpractice lawsuits involving patients who overdosed while consuming therapeutic opioids. METHODS: One of us (LRW) reviewed 35 medical records of patients with chronic pain who overdosed, 20 of them fatally, while consuming therapeutic opioids, leading to lawsuits against physicians for malpractice. The reviews were requested by plaintiff and defense attorneys from across the United States from 2005 to 2009 to ascertain which drug(s) were primarily responsible for each death and whether the death was due to physician error, patient nonadherence, or some other reason. Complaints against pharmaceutical companies were excluded. Cases were examined for common trends, and comment is offered. RESULTS: Methadone was responsible for the most deaths at 10 (50%), and hydrocodone was second at four deaths (20%) The most common risk factors found in the medical records of decedents included prescriber error in initiating, converting or titrating doses, patient nonadherence to medical instruction, presence of comorbid mental disorders, toxicological presence of benzodiazepines, middle age, and unrelieved pain. This article focuses on examples of physician errors and how they can be prevented. CONCLUSIONS: Common trends emerge from medical records of opioid decedents. Patient actions con-tribute, but physician error, particularly regarding prescribing methadone for pain, is apparent as well. A focused effort to determine the types and causes of common physician errors and how they might be avoided may lead to safer, more effective clinical interventions in the management of pain.