Author:
Shinkai Masaharu,Katsumata Noriyuki,Kawai Shinichi,Kuyama Shoichi,Sasaki Osamu,Yanagita Yasuhiro,Yoshida Minoru,Uneda Shima,Tsuji Yasushi,Harada Hidenori,Nishida Yasunori,Sakamoto Yasuhiro,Himeji Daisuke,Arioka Hitoshi,Sato Kazuhiro,Katsuki Ryo,Shomura Hiroki,Nakano Hideshi,Ohtani Hideaki,Sasaki Kazutaka,Adachi Takeshi
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
We investigated whether twice-daily administration of a bilayer tablet formulation of tramadol (35% immediate-release [IR] and 65% sustained-release) is as effective as four-times-daily IR tramadol capsules for managing cancer pain.
Methods
This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-comparator, non-inferiority study enrolled opioid-naïve patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen (paracetamol) to manage cancer pain and self-reported pain (mean value over 3 days ≥ 25 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS]). Patients were randomized to either bilayer tablets or IR capsules for 14 days. The starting dose was 100 mg/day and could be escalated to 300 mg/day. The primary endpoint was the change in VAS (averaged over 3 days) for pain at rest from baseline to end of treatment/discontinuation.
Results
Overall, 251 patients were randomized. The baseline mean VAS at rest was 47.67 mm (range: 25.6–82.7 mm). In the full analysis set, the adjusted mean change in VAS was − 22.07 and − 19.08 mm in the bilayer tablet (n = 124) and IR capsule (n = 120) groups, respectively. The adjusted mean difference was − 2.99 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] − 7.96 to 1.99 mm). The upper 95% CI was less than the predefined non-inferiority margin of 7.5 mm. Other efficacy outcomes were similar in both groups. Adverse events were reported for 97/126 (77.0%) and 101/125 (80.8%) patients in the bilayer tablet and IR capsule groups, respectively.
Conclusion
Twice-daily administration of bilayer tramadol tablets was as effective as four-times-daily administration of IR capsules regarding the improvement in pain VAS, with comparable safety outcomes.
Clinical trial registration
JapicCTI-184143/jRCT2080224082 (October 5, 2018).
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference39 articles.
1. Haenen V, Evenepoel M, De Baerdemaecker T, Meeus M, Devoogdt N, Morlion B, Dams L, Van Dijck S, Van der Gucht E, De Vrieze T, Vyvere TV, De Groef A (2023) Pain prevalence and characteristics in survivors of solid cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 31:85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07491-8
2. Snijders RAH, Brom L, Theunissen M, van den Beuken-van Everdingen MHJ (2023) Update on prevalence of pain in patients with cancer 2022: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel) 15:591. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15030591
3. Haroun R, Wood JN, Sikandar S (2022) Mechanisms of cancer pain. Front Pain Res (Lausanne) 3:1030899. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2022.1030899
4. World Health Organization (2018) WHO guidelines for the pharmacological and radiotherapeutic management of cancer pain in adults and adolescents. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550390. Accessed 30 Jun 2023
5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2023) NCCN guidelines, adult cancer pain, version 1.2023. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/pain.pdf. Accessed 30 Jun 2023