Precision Trials, LLC, Phoenix, Arizona 85032, USA.
Clin Ther. 2010 Dec;32(14):2348-69. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.12.011.
BACKGROUND: Intravenous acetaminophen has been approved in Europe and elsewhere for the treatment of acute pain and fever, and was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of mild to moderate pain, the management of moderate to severe pain with adjunctive opioid analgesics, and the reduction of fever. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of repeated doses of 2 dosing regimens of intravenous acetaminophen compared with placebo over 24 hours in subjects with moderate to severe pain after abdominal laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted at 17 sites in the United States and enrolled adult subjects (aged 18-80 years) who were randomized to 4 groups (IV acetaminophen 1000 mg [100 mL] q6h; IV acetaminophen 650 mg [65 mL] q4h; IV placebo 100 mL q6h; or IV placebo 65 mL q4h), each given as a 15-minute infusion after surgery for 24 hours. An open-label extension was offered to all subjects who remained in the hospital beyond the study period. Two subjects (1 in the placebo 100 mL q6h group and 1 in the IV acetaminophen 1000 mg q6h group) were enrolled in the open-label extension and were eligible to receive unblinded IV acetaminophen 1000 mg. Before randomization, the choice of opioid for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) rescue was left to the investigator; however, acetaminophen-containing products, NSAIDs, and aspirin were not allowed. The morning after abdominal laparoscopic surgery procedure, subjects' PCA was withheld until pain intensity (PI) was moderate (2) or severe (3) on a categorical scale (range, 0-3) and between 40 and 70 mm, inclusive, on a 100-mm visual analog scale, at which point they were randomized. After the first dose of study medication, intravenous rescue was restricted to morphine or hydromorphone, and oral rescue was restricted to morphine or oxycodone immediate-release tablets. Efficacy analyses were performed using the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as all randomized subjects who received ≥ 1 complete dose of study medication before requesting rescue medication, and who had ≥ 1 completed PI/pain relief (PR) assessment after baseline. The primary efficacy end point was the weighted sum of PI differences over 24 hours (SPID24) using an ANCOVA model. Time to meaningful PR was documented after the first dose of study medication using a double-stopwatch method: at T0, 2 stopwatches were started, and subjects were instructed to stop the first stopwatch when they felt perceptible PR and the second when it became meaningful. Safety was assessed via spontaneous adverse event (AE) reporting and laboratory tests. RESULTS: A total of 349 subjects were screened before elective surgery for eligibility. Of these, 244 subjects were randomized to a study arm (IV acetaminophen 1000 mg [n = 92]; IV acetaminophen 650 mg [n = 42]; IV placebo 100 mL [n = 43]; or IV placebo 65 mL [n = 67]) and included in the ITT population, of whom 81.1% (198/244) were women and 87.3% (213/244) were white; the mean (SD) age was 46.2 (12.51) years (range, 18-78 years), and the mean weight was 174.3 (35.7) lb (range, 103-284 lb). There was an allocation error in the contract research organization's program linking group assignment and kit randomization; therefore, the original randomization procedure was replaced with a modified randomization schedule created by an independent biostatistician under the supervision of the FDA. The mITT population included 241 subjects; of these, 227 completed 24 hours of treatment. Four subjects withdrew before completing treatment because of AEs (1 subject in the placebo group because of fever and 3 in the IV acetaminophen 1000 mg q6h group because of infusion-site pain [n = 1] or infiltration [n = 2]), 8 because of withdrawal of consent, 2 because of early discharge from the hospital, and 2 for other reasons. Only 2 subjects participated in the elective open-label extension. Both intravenous acetaminophen dosing regimens were associated with significantly reduced SPID24 compared with placebo (1000 mg q6h, P < 0.007; 650 mg q4h, P < 0.019). Among the mITT population, SPID24 (using nonimputed data after first rescue: 1000 mg q6h, P < 0.001; 650 mg q4h, P = 0.020), sum of PR scores over 24 hours (1000 mg q6h, P < 0.001; 650 mg q4h, P = 0.003) and 12 hours (1000 mg q6h, P < 0.001; 650 mg q4h, P = 0.001), and subjects' global evaluations at 24 hours (1000 mg q6h, P < 0.001; 650 mg q4h, P = 0.005) were statistically significant in favor of both acetaminophen dosing regimens compared with the combined placebo group. Time to meaningful PR (by double stopwatch method) after the first dose was significantly shorter among subjects who received IV acetaminophen 1000 mg compared with subjects in the placebo 100 mL group (median of 24.9 vs 53.9 minutes, respectively). The most common overall AEs (ie, those that occurred in >10% of any group) were constipation, flatulence, nausea, and headache. The frequency of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) across the treatment groups was not statistically significant. Most TEAEs were deemed to be unrelated to study medication. There were 6 subjects with serious TEAEs (1 [0.9%] in the IV acetaminophen 1000 mg group, 3 [7.0%] in the IV acetaminophen 650 mg group, and 2 [1.8%] in the placebo group). There was 1 (2.3%) related hepatic TEAE (transaminase increased) in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Both regimens of intravenous acetaminophen (1000 mg q6h and 650 mg q4h) were associated with statistically significant analgesic efficacy compared with placebo and were well tolerated in these adults after abdominal laparoscopic surgery. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00564486.
背景:静脉用对乙酰氨基酚已在欧洲和其他地区获得批准,用于治疗急性疼痛和发热,最近也被美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)批准用于治疗轻度至中度疼痛、辅助阿片类镇痛药治疗中度至重度疼痛以及降低发热。
目的:本研究旨在评估两种静脉用对乙酰氨基酚给药方案与安慰剂相比在 24 小时内治疗腹腔镜腹部手术后中度至重度疼痛的疗效和安全性。
方法:这是一项在美国 17 个地点进行的双盲、安慰剂对照、平行组研究,纳入了成年患者(年龄 18-80 岁),他们随机分为 4 组(静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mg[100mL]q6h;静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 650mg[65mL]q4h;静脉用安慰剂 100mLq6h;或静脉用安慰剂 65mLq4h),每组在手术后 24 小时内给予 15 分钟输注。所有在研究期间仍在住院的受试者均提供开放标签扩展。两名受试者(1 名在安慰剂 100mLq6h 组,1 名在静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mgq6h 组)参加了开放标签扩展,并符合接受未盲静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mg 的条件。在随机分组之前,研究者可以选择患者自控镇痛(PCA)解救的阿片类药物;然而,不允许使用含对乙酰氨基酚的产品、非甾体抗炎药和阿司匹林。腹腔镜手术后的第二天早上,当疼痛强度(PI)为中度(2)或重度(3)(范围,0-3)且视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分为 40-70mm 时,PCA 被停用,此时开始随机分组。在接受第一次研究药物治疗后,静脉内解救仅限于吗啡或氢吗啡酮,口服解救仅限于吗啡或羟考酮速释片。使用修改后的意向治疗(mITT)人群进行疗效分析,定义为所有接受≥1 次完整剂量研究药物治疗、在基线后至少有 1 次完成 PI/疼痛缓解(PR)评估且要求解救药物的随机受试者。主要疗效终点为 24 小时加权 PI 差值(SPID24),采用协方差分析(ANCOVA)模型进行评估。在接受第一次研究药物治疗后,通过双停表法记录达到有意义的 PR 的时间:在 T0 时,2 个停表开始计时,当受试者感觉到明显的 PR 时,让他们停止第一个停表,当 PR 变得有意义时,让他们停止第二个停表。安全性通过自发不良事件(AE)报告和实验室检查进行评估。
结果:在择期手术前,共有 349 名受试者接受了筛选,以确定其是否符合入选条件。其中 244 名受试者被随机分配至研究组(静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mg[92 名];静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 650mg[42 名];静脉用安慰剂 100mL[43 名];或静脉用安慰剂 65mL[67 名])并纳入意向治疗(ITT)人群,其中 81.1%(198/244)为女性,87.3%(213/244)为白人;平均(SD)年龄为 46.2(12.51)岁(范围,18-78 岁),平均体重为 174.3(35.7)磅(范围,103-284 磅)。合同研究组织的方案链接组分配和试剂盒随机化存在分配错误;因此,原始随机化程序被替换为一个由独立生物统计学家在 FDA 的监督下创建的修改后的随机化方案。mITT 人群包括 241 名受试者;其中 227 名完成了 24 小时的治疗。由于 AE(1 名受试者因发热,3 名受试者因静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mgq6h 组的输注部位疼痛[1 名]或渗透[2 名]而提前退出治疗)、4 名受试者因退出同意、2 名受试者因提前出院和 2 名受试者因其他原因而提前退出治疗。只有 2 名受试者参加了选择性开放标签扩展。两种静脉用对乙酰氨基酚给药方案与安慰剂相比,SPID24 均显著降低(1000mgq6h,P<0.007;650mgq4h,P<0.019)。在 mITT 人群中,SPID24(使用首次解救后的非插补数据:1000mgq6h,P<0.001;650mgq4h,P=0.020)、24 小时 PR 评分总和(1000mgq6h,P<0.001;650mgq4h,P=0.003)和 12 小时 PR 评分总和(1000mgq6h,P<0.001;650mgq4h,P=0.001)以及 24 小时受试者的全球评估(1000mgq6h,P<0.001;650mgq4h,P=0.005)在统计学上均优于安慰剂联合组。接受静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mg 的受试者与接受安慰剂 100mL 组相比,首次给药后达到有意义的 PR 的时间(通过双停表法)显著缩短(中位数分别为 24.9 分钟和 53.9 分钟)。最常见的总体不良事件(即,发生在任何一组中超过 10%的事件)为便秘、腹胀、恶心和头痛。治疗出现的不良事件(TEAE)在治疗组之间的发生率无统计学意义。大多数 TEAE 被认为与研究药物无关。有 6 名受试者出现严重的 TEAE(1 名[0.9%]在静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 1000mg 组,3 名[7.0%]在静脉用对乙酰氨基酚 650mg 组,2 名[1.8%]在安慰剂组)。安慰剂组有 1 例(2.3%)与肝相关的 TEAE(转氨酶升高)。
结论:两种静脉用对乙酰氨基酚(1000mgq6h 和 650mgq4h)与安慰剂相比均具有统计学显著的镇痛疗效,并且在腹腔镜腹部手术后的这些成年人中具有良好的耐受性。临床试验注册号:NCT00564486。