Nicholson Alexander B, Watson Graeme R, Derry Sheena, Wiffen Philip J
South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK, TS4 3BW.
Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LE.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 8;2(2):CD003971. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003971.pub4.
BACKGROUND: This is an updated review originally published in 2004 and first updated in 2007. This version includes substantial changes to bring it in line with current methodological requirements. Methadone is a synthetic opioid that presents some challenges in dose titration and is recognised to cause potentially fatal arrhythmias in some patients. It does have a place in therapy for people who cannot tolerate other opioids but should be initiated only by experienced practitioners. This review is one of a suite of reviews on opioids for cancer pain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and tolerability of methadone as an analgesic in adults and children with cancer pain. SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and clinicaltrials.gov, to May 2016, without language restriction. We also checked reference lists in relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials comparing methadone (any formulation and by any route) with active or placebo comparators in people with cancer pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All authors agreed on studies for inclusion. We retrieved full texts whenever there was any uncertainty about eligibility. One review author extracted data, which were checked by another review author. There were insufficient comparable data for meta-analysis. We extracted information on the effect of methadone on pain intensity or pain relief, the number or proportion of participants with 'no worse than mild pain'. We looked for data on withdrawal and adverse events. We looked specifically for information about adverse events relating to appetite, thirst, and somnolence. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: We revisited decisions made in the earlier version of this review and excluded five studies that were previously included. We identified one new study for this update. This review includes six studies with 388 participants. We did not identify any studies in children.The included studies differed so much in their methods and comparisons that no synthesis of results was feasible. Only one study (103 participants) specifically reported the number of participants with a given level of pain relief, in this case a reduction of at least 20% - similar in both the methadone and morphine groups. Using an outcome of 'no worse than mild pain', methadone was similar to morphine in effectiveness, and most participants who could tolerate methadone achieved 'no worse than mild pain'. Adverse event withdrawals with methadone were uncommon (12/202) and similar in other groups. Deaths were uncommon except in one study where the majority of participants died, irrespective of treatment group. For specific adverse events, somnolence was more common with methadone than with morphine, while dry mouth was more common with morphine than with methadone. None of the studies reported effects on appetite.We judged the quality of evidence to be low, downgraded due to risk of bias and sparse data. For specific adverse events, we considered the quality of evidence to be very low, downgraded due to risk of bias, sparse data, and indirectness, as surrogates for appetite, thirst and somnolence were used.There were no data on the use of methadone in children. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low-quality evidence, methadone is a drug that has similar analgesic benefits to morphine and has a role in the management of cancer pain in adults. Other opioids such as morphine and fentanyl are easier to manage but may be more expensive than methadone in many economies.
背景:这是一篇更新后的综述,最初发表于2004年,2007年首次更新。此版本包含大量修改,以符合当前的方法学要求。美沙酮是一种合成阿片类药物,在剂量滴定方面存在一些挑战,并且在某些患者中被认为会导致潜在致命的心律失常。它在无法耐受其他阿片类药物的患者的治疗中确实有一席之地,但仅应由经验丰富的从业者启动使用。本综述是关于癌症疼痛阿片类药物系列综述之一。 目的:确定美沙酮作为癌症疼痛成人和儿童镇痛药物的有效性和耐受性。 检索方法:本次更新中,我们检索了截至2016年5月的CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL和clinicaltrials.gov,无语言限制。我们还检查了相关文章的参考文献列表。 选择标准:我们寻找将美沙酮(任何剂型和途径)与癌症疼痛患者的活性或安慰剂对照进行比较的随机对照试验。 数据收集与分析:所有作者就纳入的研究达成一致。每当对资格存在任何不确定性时,我们都会检索全文。一位综述作者提取数据,另一位综述作者进行核对。由于缺乏足够的可比数据,无法进行荟萃分析。我们提取了关于美沙酮对疼痛强度或疼痛缓解的影响、“疼痛不超过轻度”的参与者数量或比例的信息。我们查找了关于撤药和不良事件的数据。我们特别查找了与食欲、口渴和嗜睡相关的不良事件的信息。我们使用GRADE评估证据并创建了一个“结果总结”表。 主要结果:我们重新审视了本综述早期版本中做出的决定,并排除了之前纳入的五项研究。本次更新我们确定了一项新研究。本综述包括六项研究,共388名参与者。我们未找到儿童相关研究。纳入的研究在方法和比较方面差异很大,因此无法对结果进行综合分析。只有一项研究(103名参与者)专门报告了达到特定疼痛缓解水平的参与者数量,在这种情况下,疼痛至少减轻20%——美沙酮组和吗啡组相似。以“疼痛不超过轻度”为结果,美沙酮在有效性方面与吗啡相似,并且大多数能够耐受美沙酮的参与者疼痛“不超过轻度”。美沙酮导致的不良事件撤药情况不常见(12/202),其他组也相似。除了一项研究中大多数参与者死亡(无论治疗组如何)外,死亡情况不常见。对于特定不良事件,美沙酮导致的嗜睡比吗啡更常见,而吗啡导致的口干比美沙酮更常见。没有研究报告对食欲的影响。我们判断证据质量为低,因存在偏倚风险和数据稀少而被降级。对于特定不良事件,我们认为证据质量非常低,因存在偏倚风险以及使用食欲、口渴和嗜睡的替代指标而导致数据稀少和间接性,从而被降级。没有关于美沙酮在儿童中使用的数据。 作者结论:基于低质量证据,美沙酮是一种与吗啡具有相似镇痛益处的药物,在成人癌症疼痛管理中具有一定作用。其他阿片类药物如吗啡和芬太尼更易于管理,但在许多经济体中可能比美沙酮更昂贵。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-2-8
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-6-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-5-17
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-5-16
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-5-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-7-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-1-13
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-5
Health Psychol Res. 2025-3-2
Support Care Cancer. 2024-10-9
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2024-9
Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2023-9-22
Support Care Cancer. 2016-5
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2014-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014-5-29
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012-5-18