MK-0703 (a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor) in acute pain associated with dental surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled dose-ranging study.

MK-0703 is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor investigated for the treatment of acute pain and inflammation. The purpose of this single-dose, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was to compare MK-0703 12.5, 50, and 100 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg or placebo in patients who experienced moderate to severe pain after surgical removal of at least 2 third molars. Overall analgesic effect, duration of analgesic effect, time to onset of analgesic effect, peak analgesic effect, and tolerability were assessed over a 24-hour postdose period. The primary endpoint of this study was total pain relief over 8 hours postdose. The study included 121 patients (mean age, 23 yr); 16, 31, 28, 31, and 15 patients enrolled in the placebo, MK-0703 12.5 mg, MK-0703 50 mg, MK-0703 100 mg, and ibuprofen 400 mg groups, respectively. Both MK-0703 50 and 100 mg were significantly more effective than placebo for all endpoints (P < 0.01) and comparable with ibuprofen 400 mg. The onset of analgesic effect in the MK-0703 50 mg and 100 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg groups did not differ significantly from each other (P > 0.20). MK-0703 was generally well tolerated in single doses up to 100 mg. In summary, MK-0703 50 and 100 mg were efficacious in the treatment of postoperative dental pain and were indistinguishable from the active comparator, ibuprofen 400 mg.

The analgesic effect of etoricoxib relative to that of cetaminophen analgesics: a randomized, controlled single-dose study in acute dental impaction pain.

BACKGROUND: To compare the analgesic effect of single doses of etoricoxib 120 mg, oxycodone/ acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg and codeine/ acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg in acute pain using the dental impaction model. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients reported pain intensity and pain relief (16 times) and global scores (twice) during a 24-h period. The primary endpoint was the overall analgesic effect, total pain relief over 6 h (TOPAR6). Other endpoints were patient global evaluation, time to onset (2-stopwatch method), duration of analgesic effect (median time to and amount of rescue medication use). Tolerability was evaluated by overall and opioid-related (nausea and vomiting) adverse experiences. RESULTS: 302 patients (mean age 23; 63% women; 63 % White) were randomized to etoricoxib 120 mg, oxycodone/acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg, codeine/acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg, and placebo (2:2:1:1). Etoricoxib demonstrated significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy (TOPAR6) (13.2 units) versus oxycodone/acetaminophen (10.2 units); and codeine/acetaminophen (6.0 units); p < 0.001 for all. All active treatments were superior to placebo. Median time to onset was significantly (p < 0.001) shorter for oxycodone/acetaminophen (20 min) and numerically but not significantly shorter (p = 0.259) for codeine/acetaminophen (26 min) compared with etoricoxib (40 min). Etoricoxib (24 h) had a significantly longer lasting analgesic effect than oxycodone/acetaminophen (5.3 h), codeine/acetaminophen (2.7 h), and placebo (1.7 h) (p < 0.001 for all). Etoricoxib patients experienced fewer clinical adverse experiences than patients on oxycodone/acetaminophen and codeine/acetaminophen, specifically, significantly (p < 0.05) fewer episodes of nausea. CONCLUSION: Etoricoxib 120 mg provided superior overall analgesic effect with a smaller percentage of patients experiencing nausea versus both oxycodone/acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg and codeine/acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg.

Etoricoxib in acute pain associated with dental surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled dose-ranging study.

BACKGROUND: Patients experiencing acute pain after surgery, including dental surgery, often require analgesia. Ideally, the chosen analgesic should have a rapid onset and sustained effect. Etoricoxib is a new cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitor that has demonstrated analgesic efficacy in the treatment of acute pain with a rapid onset and long-lasting pain relief. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the analgesic effect of single oral doses of etoricoxib 60, 120, 180, and 240 mg compared with placebo in the treatment of pain after dental surgery. Ibuprofen was used as an active control. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, single-dose, placebo- and active comparator-controlled study performed at a single center. It consisted of 3 visits (prestudy, treatment, and poststudy). Eligible patients were aged > or =16 years with moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of > or =2 third molars, of which > or =1 was an impacted mandibular molar. Patients were assessed over 24 hours and reported pain intensity and pain relied at 14 predefined time points. Plasma samples for a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis were collected from a subset of patients at baseline and the 14 predefined time points. The end points included total pain relief over 8 hours (TOPAR8, the primary end point), sum of pain intensity difference over 8 hours, patient's global evaluation of treatment, median time to onset of pain relief (2-stopwatch method), peak pain relief, and duration of analgesic effect (median time to use of rescue medication). Adverse events were collected up to 14 days postdose. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-eight (63.1% women, 36.9% men; mean age, 21.1 years; 72.1% white, 27.9% other; mean number of third molars removed, 3.5; 65.2% experiencing moderate pain) were randomly allocated to receive etoricoxib 60 mg (n = 75), etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 76), etoricoxib 180 mg (n = 74), etoricoxib 240 mg (n = 76), ibuprofen 400 mg (n = 48), and placebo (n = 49). All active treatments had significantly greater overall analgesic effect (TOPAR8) compared with placebo (P < or 0.001). Patients who received etoricoxib 120 and 180 mg had significantly higher TOPAR8 scores than those who received etoricoxib 60 mg ( P < = 0.001) and ibuprofen (P < 0.05 etoricoxib 120 mg; P < or = 0.001 etoricoxib 180 mg). Least-squares mean TOPAR8 scores for etoricoxib 60, 120, 180, and 240 mg, ibuprofen, and placebo were 16.0, 22.0, 23.5, 20.7, 18.6, and 5.2, respectively. The median time to onset of analgesia was 24 minutes for etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg, and 30 minutes for etoricoxib 60 mg and ibuprofen. There were no significant differences in the onset of analgesia between etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg and ibuprofen. The duration of analgesic effect was >24 hours for etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg, and 12.1 hours for etoricoxib 60 mg. The duration of effect was significantly longer with all 4 etoricoxib doses compared with ibuprofen (10.1 hours; P < 0.05 etoricoxib 60 mg; < or = 0.001etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg) and compared with placebo (2.1 hours; P < = 0.001). In the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis (n approximately 120), there was a linear relationship between plasma etoricoxib concentrations and pain relief scores up to the maximum observed concentration, followed by a decline in plasma concentrations with persistent analgesia. The most common adverse events were postextraction alveolitis and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: In this dose-ranging study, etoricoxib 120 mg was determined to be the minimum dose that had maximal efficacy in patients with moderate to severe acute pain associated with dental surgery. Both etoricoxib and ibuprofen were generally well tolerated.

Comparison of rofecoxib and oxycodone plus acetaminophen in the treatment of acute pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain in the third molar extraction model.

BACKGROUND: Opiates, acetaminophen, nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors such as rofecoxib are used in the treatment of acute pain because of their anti-inflammatory and/or analgesic properties. Rofecoxib has demonstrated an improved gastrointestinal safety profile compared with nonselective NSAIDs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and tolerability profile of rofecoxib 50 mg with those of the centrally acting, nonsalicylate, opiate/nonopiate analgesic combination oxycodone/acetominophen 5/325 in patients with pain after dental surgery. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled study, patients experiencing moderate to severe postoperative pain after extraction of > or =2 third molars (including > or =1 mandibular impaction) received a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg, oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg, or placebo. End points included total pain relief over 6 hours (TOPAR6, the primary end point) and 4 hours (TOPAR4), patient's global assessment of treatment at 6 hours (GLOBAL6) and 24 hours (GLOBAL24), summed pain intensity difference over 6 hours (SPID6), onset of analgesic effect (time to perceptible/meaningful pain relief, using a 2-stopwatch method), peak pain relief (PEAKPR), peak pain intensity difference (PEAKPID), and duration of analgesic effect (time to use of rescue analgesia). RESULTS: Two hundred twelve patients (63% female, 37% male; 76% white, 24% other; mean [SD] age, 20.9 [4.4] years; age range, 16-41 years) were enrolled in the study and received a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 90), oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg (n = 91), or placebo (n = 31). The analgesic effect of rofecoxib was significantly greater than that of oxycodone/acetaminophen at P < 0.001 for TOPAR6, TOPAR4, GLOBAL6, GLOBAL24, and SPID6; at P < 0.010 for PEAKPR and PEAKPID; and at P < 0.001 for median time to use of rescue analgesia. Significantly fewer patients in the rofecoxib group (72.2%) took rescue analgesia within 24 hours postdose compared with the oxycodone/acetaminophen group (94.5%; P < 0.001) and the placebo group (96.8%; P < 0.02). Both active treatments were similar with respect to onset of analgesic effect. Both were generally well tolerated; the overall incidence of adverse experiences in the rofecoxib, oxycodone/acetaminophen, and placebo groups was 51.1%, 64.8%, and 48.4%, respectively. Rofecoxib was associated with a significantly lower incidence of nausea (18.9% vs 39.6%; P < 0.001) and vomiting (6.7% vs 23.1%; P < 0.001) compared with oxycodone/acetaminophen. CONCLUSIONS: In study patients with moderate to severe pain after dental surgery, rofecoxib 50 mg had a greater analgesic effect than oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg and was associated with less nausea and vomiting.

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.

A comparison of rofecoxib versus celecoxib in treating pain after dental surgery: a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study using the dental impaction pain model.

BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib and celecoxib, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, have analgesic efficacy similar to that of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to confirm earlier findings that the overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was superior to that of celecoxib 200 mg and to extend the comparison to include celecoxib 400 mg. METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study, patients who experienced moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of at least 2 third molars received a single oral dose of either rofecoxib 50 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, ibuprofen 400 mg, or placebo. Patients recorded scores of pain intensity, pain relief, and global assessment at prespecified time intervals throughout the 24-hour period after dosing. The end points were total pain relief (TOPAR) score over 8 hours (TOPAR8; primary end point), TOPAR score over 12 hours (TOPAR12), sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) over 8 and 12 hours (SPID8 and SPID12), patient's global assessment of study drug at 8 hours, time to confirmed perceptible pain relief (ie, time to onset of analgesic effect), peak pain intensity difference (PID), peak pain relief, time to first dose of rescue medication (ie, duration of analgesic effect), and percentage of patients using rescue medication. RESULTS: A total of 482 patients (358 females, 124 males; mean age, 22.1 years) were enrolled. Rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 151 patients) demonstrated significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with celecoxib 400 mg (n = 151), as measured by TOPAR8 (least squares mean [SE] 17.2 [0.8] vs 15.0 [0.8]; P < 0.05) and TOPAR12 (25.3 [1.2] vs 21.0 [1.2]; P < 0.05), as well as a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.05). Time to onset of analgesic effect and peak analgesic effect were similar for rofecoxib 50 mg and celecoxib 400 mg. Rofecoxib also showed significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy than did celecoxib 200 mg (n = 90), including greater TOPAR8 scores (17.2 [0.8] vs 11.5 [1.1]; P < 0.001), faster onset of analgesic effect (P < 0.001), greater peak analgesic effect (P < 0.001 for peak pain relief and peak PID), and longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.001). The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg (n = 45), except that the duration of analgesic effect of rofecoxib 50 mg was significantly longer (P < 0.001). All active treatments produced significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of placebo (P < 0.001 for all scores [TOPAR8, TOPAR12, SPID8, SPID12, and patient's global assessment] for all study drugs). The adverse-events (AE) profile was generally similar in all treatment groups. The 3 most common AEs were nausea, postextraction alveolitis, and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, rofecoxib 50 mg provided generally superior overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of celecoxib 400 and 200 mg, including a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect. The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was generally similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg, except for a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect.

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.

The anxiolytic effect of the novel antipsychotic ziprasidone compared with diazepam in subjects anxious before dental surgery.

The novel atypical antipsychotic ziprasidone has a pharmacologic profile notable for potent agonism of serotonin (5-HT)1A receptors, antagonism at 5-HT1D receptors, and reuptake inhibition of norepinephrine. 5-HT1A receptor agonism, in particular, suggests anxiolytic activity, and ziprasidone has shown preliminary efficacy in treating the symptoms of anxiety associated with psychotic disorders. In this study, the anxiolytic efficacy of ziprasidone was evaluated in nonpsychotic subjects who were anxious before undergoing minor dental surgery. We compared a single oral dose of 20 mg ziprasidone (N = 30) with that of 10 mg diazepam (N = 30) and placebo (N = 30) in a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind study. The peak anxiolytic effect of ziprasidone compared with that of placebo was similar to that of diazepam but had a later onset. At 3 hours postdose, the anxiolytic effect of ziprasidone was significantly greater than that of placebo (p < 0.05) and somewhat greater than that of diazepam. Diazepam showed a significantly greater anxiolytic effect than placebo at 1 hour (p < 0.05) but not at 3 hours. The sedative effect of ziprasidone was never greater than that of placebo, whereas that of diazepam was significantly greater than that of placebo 1 to 1.5 hours postdose. Ziprasidone was generally well tolerated. Only one patient reported treatment-related adverse events (nausea and vomiting) and, unlike diazepam, ziprasidone did not cause reductions in blood pressure. Dystonia, extrapyramidal syndrome, akathisia, and postural hypotension were not seen with ziprasidone. Thus, ziprasidone may possess anxiolytic effects in addition to its antipsychotic properties.