Immediate-release tapentadol or oxycodone for treatment of acute postoperative pain after elective arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized, phase IIIb study.

OBJECTIVE: Arthroscopic shoulder surgery can result in substantial postoperative pain. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tapentadol immediate release (IR) or oxycodone IR in this setting for the treatment of acute pain. DESIGN: Subjects received tapentadol IR 50 or 100 mg or oxycodone IR 5 or 10 mg every 4-6 hours as needed for pain up to 7 days after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Twice daily, subjects recorded pain intensity from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine) and pain relief from 0 (none) to 5 (complete). Final assessments included patient and clinician global impression of change and subject satisfaction with treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the sum of pain intensity differences (SPID) over 3 days. RESULTS: Of 378 subjects (192 tapentadol IR, 186 oxycodone IR) who took study medication, 312 (158 tapentadol IR, 154 oxycodone IR) had pain intensity ≥4 before the first dose and were evaluated for efficacy. Mean SPID scores over 3 days were 32.1 and 41.1 in the tapentadol IR and oxycodone IR groups, respectively (least-squares mean difference [95% confidence interval], 9.0 [-18.9, 36.9]; p = 0.527). Secondary analyses of pain intensity, pain relief, and subject satisfaction were similar between groups. Subjects and clinicians reported significantly better global impression of change for tapentadol IR. Adverse events were consistent with established safety profiles for IR opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Tapentadol IR and oxycodone IR had similar efficacy for pain after arthroscopic shoulder surgery, but subjects and clinicians reported greater overall improvement with tapentadol IR.

Physician management of moderate-to-severe acute pain: results from the Physicians Partnering Against Pain (P³) study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences among physician specialties in the management of acute pain including prescribing practices and management of opioid-related side effects. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The Physicians Partnering Against Pain (P³) survey was a nationwide study of US physicians and their patients with severe to moderate acute pain (<3 months). MAIN MEASURES: Physicians were surveyed about volume of patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain in their practice, frequency of prescribing opioid analgesics, percentage of these patients returning for a follow-up visit after treatment, reasons patients discontinue treatment, frequency of recommending or prescribing treatment for opioid-related gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, and frequency of patients taking opioid analgesics that take additional treatments to manage GI side effects. RESULTS: The 5,982 participating physicians represented primary care physicians (PCPs; 52 percent), pain specialists (25 percent), and other specialists (23 percent). PCPs and other specialists were less likely than pain specialists to prescribe opioid analgesics to patients (25.8 percent, 29.5 percent, and 44.8 percent, respectively). The vast majority of pain specialists (78 percent) also indicated that more than three quarters of their patients returned for a follow-up visit compared with only 40 percent of PCPs and 65 percent of other specialists. When ranking the reasons why they think patients discontinue opioid analgesics, pain specialists ranked unacceptable side effects higher than PCPs and other specialists. PCPs and pain specialists were more likely than other specialists to recommend or prescribe treatments to manage opioid-related side effects, such as nausea, vomiting, and constipation (38.3 percent, 38.5 percent, and 23.1 percent, respectively). CONCLUSION: The P(3) Study confirms the challenge of pain management while balancing tolerability of opioid treatments from the physician perspective.

Tapentadol, oxycodone or placebo for acute pain of vertebral compression fractures: a randomized Phase IIIb study.

UNLABELLED: SUMMARY  AIM: Tapentadol is a centrally acting analgesic that combines µ-opioid receptor agonism with norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tapentadol immediate-release (IR), oxycodone IR or placebo in subjects with acute pain from vertebral compression fracture (VCF) associated with osteoporosis. PATIENTS & METHODS: Study patients were adults with new onset of pain or acute exacerbation of previous pain from VCF associated with osteoporosis, radiographic confirmation of VCF and back pain intensity of 5 or greater on an 11-point scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). Patients were randomized to treatment with tapentadol IR (50 mg, then 50 or 75 mg), oxycodone IR (5 mg, then 5 or 10 mg) or placebo every 4-6 h as needed for pain, for up to 10 days. Twice daily, subjects recorded pain intensity on the 11-point scale (numeric rating scale), pain relief on a 5-point scale from 0 (none) to 4 (complete), sleep assessments (morning assessment only) and any episodes of vomiting (evening assessment only). RESULTS: The study was designed to include 625 subjects, but was stopped after 14 months due to slow enrollment (44 tapentadol IR, 43 oxycodone IR and 21 placebo subjects) and had insufficient statistical power for comparative efficacy analyses. Discontinuation rates in the tapentadol IR, oxycodone IR and placebo groups were 18.2, 27.9 and 9.5%, respectively, often due to adverse events (4.5, 18.6 and 4.8%, respectively). Treatment-emergent adverse-event rates were 63.6, 81.4 and 38.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this prematurely terminated study in adults with painful VCF, trends suggested that tapentadol IR was tolerated better than oxycodone IR.

Opioids before and after initiation of pregabalin in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

OBJECTIVES: To examine opioid prescription claims before and after initiation of pregabalin in patients with a diagnosis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: This retrospective analysis used a national commercial database of integrated inpatient, outpatient, and prescription claims to identify adults with a DPN diagnosis code within 360 days prior to the first claim for pregabalin between January 1, 2006 and March 31, 2008. Prescription claims for pregabalin or opioids were analyzed in nine consecutive 60-day periods from 180 days before through 360 days after the first pregabalin claim. It was not possible to establish drug administration dates, compliance rates, indications for opioid use, or reasons for treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: Of the 8004 adults who met eligibility criteria, 6080 (76%) received an opioid within the 180 days before and/or 360 days after their first prescription for pregabalin, including 3956 (49%) both before and after, 1580 (20%) after only, and 544 (7%) before only. The percentage of patients with pregabalin claims covering ≥20 of 60 days (within 60-day periods) was 99% (day 1-60), 63% (day 61-120), 50% (day 121-180), 45% (day 181-240), 42% (day 241-300), and 39% (day 301-360). The percentage of patients with opioid claims covering ≥20 of 60 days within the 60-day periods remained stable (range, 25-30%). Among patients with opioid claims, 73-76% received only short-acting opioids, 6-7% received only long-acting opioids, and 18-20% received both short- and long-acting opioids. In the first year, 982 (12%) patients had opioid claims covering ≥20 of 60 days in every 60-day period (i.e., persistent use of opioids). Coexisting musculoskeletal (95%) or neuropathic (61%) pain conditions were frequent. CONCLUSION: A majority of patients with DPN receive an opioid before and/or after their first pregabalin claim. Pregabalin neither interferes with nor replaces opioid use for pain management in patients with DPN. Although nearly 1 in 8 patients received opioids throughout the study period, most claims were for short-acting opioids. The majority of this DPN sample had other pain conditions, including musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain conditions. These results highlight the frequency of opioid use with pregabalin, particularly short-acting opioids.

Effects of extended-release tramadol on pain-related sleep parameters in patients with osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of extended release tramadol (tramadol ER) on reducing pain-related sleep disturbances (PRSDs) in patients (20-80 years) with moderate to moderately severe pain with radiographically confirmed osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of two 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-group studies was conducted. In Study A, patients (n = 1,020) received tramadol ER 100, 200, 300, or 400 mg, or placebo. In Study B (n = 1,011), patients received tramadol ER 100, 200, or 300 mg, or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PRSDs were evaluated using the Chronic Pain Sleep Inventory (CPSI) based on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS; 0 = very poor, 100 = excellent for the overall quality of sleep). RESULTS: Significant improvements in CPSI scores from baseline were seen as early as week 1 in all tramadol ER groups and were maintained through the final visit for overall sleep quality compared with placebo (all p < or = 0.022). Compared with placebo, significant improvements in scores from baseline were seen beginning at week 1 for tramadol ER 200 and 300 mg and week 3 for tramadol ER 100 mg, and were maintained in all dose groups through the final visit, for being awakened by pain in the night and in the morning, and less trouble falling asleep due to pain (all p < or = 0.046). CONCLUSION: In this post hoc analysis, a reduction in pain was associated with a significant reduction in PRSDs due to OA.

Extended-release tramadol (tramadol ER) in the treatment of chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of tramadol ER 300 mg and 200 mg versus placebo once daily in the treatment of chronic low back pain, using an open-label run-in followed by, without washout, a randomized controlled study design. METHODS: Adults with scores > or = 40 on a pain intensity visual analog scale (VAS; 0 = no pain; 100 = extreme pain) received open-label tramadol ER, initiated at 100 mg once daily and titrated to 300 mg once daily during a three-week open-label run-in. Patients completing run-in were randomized to receive tramadol ER 300 mg, 200 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Of 619 patients enrolled, 233 (38 percent) withdrew from the run-in, primarily because of adverse event (n = 128) or lack of efficacy (n = 41). A total of 386 patients were then randomized to receive either 300 mg (n = 128), 200 mg (n = 129), or placebo (n = 129). Following randomization, mean scores for pain intensity VAS since the previous visit, averaged over the 12-week study period, increased more in the placebo group (12.2 mm) than in the tramadol ER 300-mg (5.2 mm, p = 0.009) and 200-mg (7.8 mm, p = 0.052) groups. Secondary efficacy scores for current pain intensity VAS, patient global assessment, Roland Disability Index, and overall sleep quality improved significantly (p < or = 0.029 each) in the tramadol ER groups compared with placebo. The most common adverse events during the double-blind period were nausea, constipation, headache, dizziness, insomnia, and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who tolerated and obtained pain relief from tramadol ER, continuation of tramadol ER treatment for 12 weeks maintained pain relief more effectively than placebo. Adverse events were similar to those previously reported for tramadol ER.

Open-label study of the safety and effectiveness of long-term therapy with extended-release tramadol in the management of chronic nonmalignant pain.

BACKGROUND: Tramadol ER* is a once-daily oral analgesic for management of moderate-to-moderately severe chronic pain in adults who require around-the-clock treatment of pain. This study evaluated long-term safety of tramadol ER and effectiveness outcomes in the management of chronic, nonmalignant pain. METHODS: Patients enrolled directly for approximately 1 year of open-label tramadol ER treatment if they had chronic, nonmalignant pain (n = 919), or 'rolled over' for 38 weeks of open-label tramadol ER treatment if they completed either of two 12-week, placebo-controlled studies of tramadol ER for low back pain (n = 72) or osteoarthritis (n = 61). Tramadol ER was titrated to a dose of 300 mg once daily (patients >or= 75 years) or 300-400 mg once daily (patients < 75 years). RESULTS: A total of 257 (24%) patients completed the study. Common adverse events, regardless of treatment relationship, were nausea, dizziness (excluding vertigo), and constipation. Mean scores for current pain intensity (from 0 = no pain to 100 = extreme pain) and least, worst, and average pain intensity over the past week improved at every post-baseline visit. At each post-baseline visit, > 50% of patients provided a global assessment rating of good, very good, or excellent. Study limitations were mandatory titration to 400 mg in some patients, concomitant analgesic therapy as a confounding variable, and lack of a placebo comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Individualized dose titration and limiting once-daily therapy with tramadol ER to the maximum recommended daily dose of 300 mg may balance tolerability and analgesic effects of tramadol ER in patients with chronic, nonmalignant pain.

Pharmacokinetic model and simulations of dose conversion from immediate- to extended-release tramadol.

OBJECTIVE: Extended-release tramadol (tramadol ER) is a once-daily formulation of tramadol approved in the United States for moderate to moderately severe chronic pain in adults. This modeling and simulation analysis was conducted to support dosing recommendations for switching patients receiving immediate-release tramadol (tramadol IR) to tramadol ER. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations based on steady-state data from three Phase 1 studies predicted minimum plasma concentration (C(min)), maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), and area under the plasma-concentration-versus-time curve (AUC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between 100-mg daily increments of tramadol ER every 24 h (Q24H) and corresponding 25-mg increments of tramadol IR every 6 h (Q6H), such as tramadol ER 200 mg Q24H versus tramadol IR 200, 225, 250, and 275 mg daily. RESULTS: Tramadol ER and IR were predicted to provide similar exposure (AUC) at a total daily dose of 100, 200, or 300 mg. Estimated exposure was comparable between tramadol IR 125-, 225-, and 325-mg and tramadol ER 100-, 200-, and 300-mg, respectively. Estimated exposure was 30-41% lower with tramadol ER 100 mg versus tramadol IR 150 and 175 mg daily, 15-26% lower with tramadol ER 200 mg versus tramadol IR 250 and 275 mg daily, and 8-19% lower with tramadol ER 300 mg versus tramadol IR 350 and 375 mg daily. CONCLUSIONS: This pharmacokinetic analysis supports switching patients from a total daily dose of tramadol IR 200 or 300 mg directly to tramadol ER 200 and 300 mg once daily, respectively. Patients who take other doses of tramadol IR may switch to the next lower 100-mg increment of tramadol ER (e.g., from tramadol IR 225, 250, or 275 mg daily in divided doses to tramadol ER 200 mg once daily). Confirmation of these findings would require clinical studies comparing the systemic exposure of tramadol upon switching from the IR to the ER formulation.

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

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

Extended-release tramadol in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tramadol extended-release (tramadol ER) tablets once daily in subjects with osteoarthritis pain. METHODS: This 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial included 1020 adults with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip and baseline pain intensity >or= 40 on a 100-mm pain visual analog scale (0 = no pain, 100 = extreme pain). Subjects took placebo or were titrated to a target dose of tramadol ER 100, 200, 300, or 400 mg once daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The co-primary efficacy variables were pain and physical function subscales of the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index and subject global assessment of disease activity. RESULTS: Mean changes in WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index pain and physical function subscales were significantly different between tramadol ER and placebo, overall (p

Neuropsychological effects of long-term opioid use in chronic pain patients.

Opioids are thought to worsen the performance of psychomotor tasks due to their sedating and mental-clouding effects. As a result, some safety regulations currently restrict the use of opioids when driving or using heavy equipment. We investigated the psychomotor effects of long-term opioid use in 144 patients with low back pain. All subjects were administered two neuropsychological tests (Digit Symbol and Trail Making Test-B) before being prescribed opioids for pain; tests were re-administered at 90- and 180-day intervals. Test scores significantly improved while subjects were taking opioids for pain, which suggests that long-term use of oxycodone with acetaminophen or transdermal fentanyl does not significantly impair cognitive ability or psychomotor function.