文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

Transdermal buprenorphine patches applied in a 4-day regimen versus a 3-day regimen: a single-site, Phase III, randomized, open-label, crossover comparison.

作者信息

Likar Rudolf, Lorenz Violetta, Korak-Leiter Maria, Kager Ingo, Sittl Reinhard

机构信息

Interdisciplinary Pain Clinic, General Hospital Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, Austria.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2007 Aug;29(8):1591-606. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.08.001.


DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.08.001
PMID:17919542
Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2001, a transdermal matrix patch formulation of buprenorphine was approved for the treatment of moderate to severe cancer pain and severe pain that is unresponsive to nonopioid analgesics. The primary recommendation contained in the prescribing information was that transdermal patches be worn for a 3-day period before application of a new patch. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate the potential for extending the time the buprenorphine patch is worn from 3 to 4 days. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, open-label, crossover Phase III study compared the efficacy and tolerability of the buprenorphine transdermal patch applied for different durations, with patch changes every 3 days versus every 4 days (12 days each), in patients with chronic moderate or severe pain of malignant or nonmalignant origin. Study participants were aged >18 years, had already responded to at least 4 weeks of transdermal buprenorphine, and had achieved steady-state conditions for at least 2 weeks before enrollment. The primary end point was patients' rating of the quality of treatment (analgesic efficacy and tolerability, rated on a 5-point scale: very good, good, satisfactory, poor, and inadequate) at the completion of each treatment regimen. Also recorded were physicians' ratings of the quality of treatment; pain intensity, rated on an 11-point numerical rating scale (from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) and on the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) (maximum pain = 3.0); health status, assessed using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), expressed as a percentage of the best health condition (100%); and pain relief (5-point scale: complete, good, satisfactory, slight, and none). Local skin tolerability was evaluated for objective and subjective dermatologic symptoms at the patch application sites. Patients recorded daily pain intensities at specified times of day and night, pain relief (5-point verbal rating scale), and sleep duration (<or=2 hours, >2-3 hours, >3-<6 hours, or >or=6 hours) in a diary. The safety profile was evaluated based on standard monitoring of adverse events, vital signs, and routine laboratory tests. RESULTS: Forty-nine white patients (25 women, 24 men) were enrolled; their mean (SD) age was 61.6 (11.5) years, and their mean weight was 74.7 (16.7) kg. The most common source of pain was musculoskeletal disorders (40 patients), followed by nervous system disorders (10), neoplasms (9), injuries (5), and other causes (6). Forty-one patients completed the study; 2 patients discontinued because of adverse events, 1 because of lack of efficacy, and 5 for nonmedical reasons. Thirty-three patients provided data per protocol. Patients in the perprotocol population received a mean (SD) transdermal buprenorphine dose of 49.9 (38.9) microg/h. The proportion of patients in the per-protocol population rating the quality of treatment as adequate (combined ratings of very good, good, and satisfactory) was 93.9% (31/33) for both regimens. The physicians' ratings indicated adequate quality of treatment in 93.8% (30/32) of patients applying 4 patches for 3 days each and 97.0% (32/33) of patients applying 3 patches for 4 days each. Mean (SD) pain intensity scores on the numerical rating scale were similar after completion of the 3- and 4-day regimens (3.73 [1.88] and 3.88 [1.75] points, respectively), as were MPQ scores (0.79 [0.67] and 0.79 [0.78]). The mean (SD) proportion of days with at least satisfactory pain relief was 83.9% (26.1%) and 85.6% (24.4%) for the 3- and 4-day regimens; the corresponding proportions of nights with at least satisfactory pain relief were 85.2% (26.6%) and 88.1% (21.4%). Continuously assessed pain intensities at specified times of day and night (numerical rating scale) did not differ significantly between regimens. Mean SF-36 health status scores did not differ significantly between regimens (total score: 37.7% [17.0%] and 37.7% [17.3%]). Mean rates of nights with good sleep quality were 28.5% (39.9%) for the 3-day regimen and 36.0% (42.6%) for the 4-day regimen. Local skin tolerability was comparable for the 3- and 4-day regimens, with objective findings (mainly erythema) at the patch-application sites in 17 of 32 and 11 of 33 patients, respectively, and subjective symptoms (mainly itching) in 16 of 32 and 13 of 33 patients. The most common adverse events in the safety population were nausea, dizziness/giddiness, and malaise/fatigue (3/49 [6.1%] each). CONCLUSION: Analgesic efficacy, patients' satisfaction with the quality of treatment, and skin tolerability did not differ significantly between 3 and 4 days of patch application in these patients with chronic pain who had been previously stabilized on transdermal buprenorphine.

摘要

相似文献

[1]
Transdermal buprenorphine patches applied in a 4-day regimen versus a 3-day regimen: a single-site, Phase III, randomized, open-label, crossover comparison.

Clin Ther. 2007-8

[2]
Effectiveness and tolerability of the buprenorphine transdermal system in patients with moderate to severe chronic pain: a multicenter, open-label, uncontrolled, prospective, observational clinical study.

Clin Ther. 2005-4

[3]
Long-term management of chronic pain with transdermal buprenorphine: a multicenter, open-label, follow-up study in patients from three short-term clinical trials.

Clin Ther. 2006-6

[4]
Transdermal buprenorphine in the treatment of chronic pain: results of a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Clin Ther. 2004-11

[5]
Transdermal buprenorphine in clinical practice--a post-marketing surveillance study in 13,179 patients.

Curr Med Res Opin. 2005-8

[6]
Buprenorphine transdermal delivery system in adults with persistent noncancer-related pain syndromes who require opioid therapy: a multicenter, 5-week run-in and randomized, double-blind maintenance-of-analgesia study.

Clin Ther. 2007-10

[7]
Comparable analgesic efficacy of transdermal buprenorphine in patients over and under 65 years of age.

Clin J Pain. 2008

[8]
Opioids and the management of chronic severe pain in the elderly: consensus statement of an International Expert Panel with focus on the six clinically most often used World Health Organization Step III opioids (buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone).

Pain Pract. 2008

[9]
Efficacy and safety of low-dose transdermal buprenorphine patches (5, 10, and 20 microg/h) versus prolonged-release tramadol tablets (75, 100, 150, and 200 mg) in patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain: a 12-week, randomized, open-label, controlled, parallel-group noninferiority study.

Clin Ther. 2009-3

[10]
Efficacy and tolerability of oxymorphone immediate release for acute postoperative pain after abdominal surgery: a randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial.

Clin Ther. 2007-6

引用本文的文献

[1]
Buprenorphine for Chronic Pain Management: a Narrative Review.

Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2023-12

[2]
Safety And Efficacy Of The Unique Opioid Buprenorphine For The Treatment Of Chronic Pain.

J Pain Res. 2019-12-13

[3]
[Pharmacological aspects of pain research in Germany].

Schmerz. 2015-10

[4]
Buprenorphine for treating cancer pain.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-3-31

[5]
A meta-analysis of efficacy and tolerability of buprenorphine for the relief of cancer pain.

Springerplus. 2014-2-13

[6]
Opioids compared to placebo or other treatments for chronic low-back pain.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-8-27

[7]
Safety and efficacy of transdermal buprenorphine for the relief of cancer pain.

J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013-8-7

[8]
Transdermal buprenorphine - a critical appraisal of its role in pain management.

J Pain Res. 2009-9-15

[9]
Transdermal buprenorphine in non-oncological moderate-to-severe chronic pain.

Clin Drug Investig. 2010

[10]
Managing severe cancer pain: the role of transdermal buprenorphine: a systematic review.

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2009-9-15

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索