Long-Term Effectiveness and Tolerability of Pain Treatment with Tapentadol Prolonged Release.

BACKGROUND: The central analgesic tapentadol prolonged release (PR) has proven effective and generally well tolerated in a broad range of chronic pain conditions. Long-term data of its use are still scarce. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate long-term effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of tapentadol PR in patients with severe chronic osteoarthritis (OA) knee pain or low back pain (LBP) who responded to tapentadol in 1 of 4 preceding 12-week phase 3b clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label, uncontrolled, observational extension study of up to 72 weeks. SETTING: Fourteen centers in Spain. Protocol approval by the reference ethics committee for all the participating centers. METHODS: Eligible patients started the extension trial on the tapentadol PR dosage optimized for them in the preceding trial; dose adjustments were permitted throughout the extension. Treatment effectiveness outcomes included changes in pain intensity, sleep, state of health, quality of life, patient and clinician global impression of change, and patients' satisfaction with treatment. Patients with OA knee pain also answered the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA index, and patients with LBP with a possible neuropathic pain component completed neuropathic pain-related questionnaires. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were enrolled: 40 with OA knee pain, 43 with LBP. The full analysis set consisted of 81 patients. Mean pain intensity remained relatively stable over the 72-week extension period with mean increases from baseline of 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.1,1.0; Numeric Rating Scale) for all patients, 0.2 (95% CI, -0.5, 0.9) for patients with OA, and 0.68 (95% CI, -0.2, 1.6) for patients with LBP. State of health and quality of life baseline ratings were maintained; overall impression of change was "improved." Most patients (88.9%) reported at least good treatment satisfaction at the end of treatment. Mean daily tapentadol PR doses slightly increased from 313.3 ± 139.5 mg at baseline to 315.7 ± 140.1 mg at end of study. Uptitration was required for 8.4% of the patients, 4.8% had a dose reduction during the trial. Adverse events considered probably/likely or certainly related to tapentadol PR treatment by the investigator were documented for 18.1% of all patients, most commonly constipation (7.2%). Seven patients (8.4%) experienced adverse events leading to premature discontinuation. LIMITATIONS: An open-label design, stable concomitant analgesics (World Health Organization step I), and dose adjustments were allowed during the study. All patients had benefitted from tapentadol PR in preceding trials. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained pain relief and quality of life for up to 72 treatment weeks under relatively stable dosing, as well as the good safety profile, indicate the usefulness of tapentadol PR for patients who suffer from severe chronic OA knee pain and LBP with limited risk for tolerance development.

Quality of life and functional outcomes with tapentadol prolonged release in chronic musculoskeletal pain: post hoc analysis.

Aims: To investigate quality of life (QOL) and functionality changes in chronic pain during tapentadol prolonged release (PR) treatment. Patients & methods: Post hoc analysis of data from three Phase III trials in patients with osteoarthritis knee pain or low back pain. QOL and functionality changes were assessed by SF-36 scores. Results: All SF-36 subdomain scores improved progressively to week 3 of tapentadol titration and were sustained during 12-week maintenance treatment. Improvements in SF-36 scores were similar between tapentadol dose groups (e.g., 200 to <300 mg vs ≥500 mg), with no greater effect from higher doses. QOL and functionality improvements were consistently greater with tapentadol PR than oxycodone controlled release. Conclusion: Tapentadol PR provides consistent, clinically relevant improvements in QOL and functionality in chronic pain.

A holistic approach to chronic pain management that involves all stakeholders: change is needed.

Chronic pain affects a large proportion of the population, imposing significant individual distress and a considerable burden on society, yet treatment is not always instituted and/or adequate. Comprehensive multidisciplinary management based on the biopsychosocial model of pain has been shown to be clinically effective and cost-efficient, but is not widely available. A literature review of stakeholder groups revealed many reasons for this, including: i) many patients believe healthcare professionals lack relevant knowledge, and consultations are rushed, ii) general practitioners consider that pain management has a low priority and is under-resourced, iii) pain specialists cite non-adherence to evidence-based treatment, sub-optimal prescribing, and chronic pain not being regarded as a disease in its own right, iv) nurses', pharmacists' and physiotherapists' skills are not fully utilized, and v) psychological therapy is employed infrequently and often too late. Many of the issues relating to physicians could be addressed by improving medical training, both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels - for example, by making pain medicine a compulsory core subject of the undergraduate medical curriculum. This would improve physician/patient communication, increase the use of standardized pain assessment tools, and allow more patients to participate in treatment decisions. Patient care would also benefit from improved training for other multidisciplinary team members; for example, nurses could provide counseling and follow-up support, psychologists offer coping skills training, and physiotherapists have a greater role in rehabilitation. Equally important measures include the widespread adoption of a patient-centered approach, chronic pain being recognized as a disease in its own right, and the development of universal guidelines for managing chronic non-cancer pain. Perhaps the greatest barrier to improvement is lack of political will at both national and international level. Some powerful initiatives and collaborations are currently lobbying policy-making bodies to raise standards and reduce unnecessary pain - it is vital they continue.

Pain in the cancer patient: different pain characteristics CHANGE pharmacological treatment requirements.

Twenty years ago, the main barriers to successful cancer pain management were poor assessment by physicians, and patients' reluctance to report pain and take opioids. Those barriers are almost exactly the same today. Cancer pain remains under-treated; in Europe, almost three-quarters of cancer patients experience pain, and almost a quarter of those with moderate to severe pain do not receive any analgesic medication. Yet it has been suggested that pain management could be improved simply by ensuring that every consultation includes the patient's rating of pain, that the physician pays attention to this rating, and a plan is agreed to increase analgesia when it is inadequate. After outlining current concepts of carcinogenesis in some detail, this paper describes different methods of classifying and diagnosing cancer pain and the extent of current under-treatment. Key points are made regarding cancer pain management. Firstly, the pain may be caused by multiple different mechanisms and therapy should reflect those underlying mechanisms - rather than being simply based on pain intensity as recommended by the WHO three-step ladder. Secondly, a multidisciplinary approach is required which combines both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, such as psychotherapy, exercise therapy and electrostimulation. The choice of analgesic agent and its route of administration are considered, along with various interventional procedures and the requirements of palliative care. Special attention is paid to the treatment of breakthrough pain (particularly with fast-acting fentanyl formulations, which have pharmacokinetic profiles that closely match those of breakthrough pain episodes) and chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain, which affects around one third of patients who receive chemotherapy. Finally, the point is made that medical education should place a greater emphasis on pain therapy, both at undergraduate and postgraduate level.

Defining opioid tolerance and dependency.

This report is adapted from paineurope 2013; Issue 2, ©Haymarket Medical Publications Ltd., and is presented with permission. paineurope is provided as a service to pain management by Mundipharma International, LTD. and is distributed free of charge to healthcare professionals in Europe. Archival issues can be accessed via the website: http://www.paineurope.com at which European health professionals can register online to receive copies of the quarterly publication.