Suppr超能文献

一项随机、双盲、双模拟、交叉试验,比较口服缓释氢吗啡酮与即释氢吗啡酮在癌症疼痛患者中的安全性和有效性。加拿大姑息治疗临床试验组。

A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover trial comparing the safety and efficacy of oral sustained-release hydromorphone with immediate-release hydromorphone in patients with cancer pain. Canadian Palliative Care Clinical Trials Group.

作者信息

Bruera E, Sloan P, Mount B, Scott J, Suarez-Almazor M

机构信息

Division of Palliative Care Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 1996 May;14(5):1713-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1996.14.5.1713.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new slow-release preparation of hydromorphone (SRH) in the treatment of cancer pain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety-five adult patients from three Canadian Palliative Care Centers with no evidence of mental impairment received treatment for cancer pain with an oral opioid analgesic. After informed consent was obtained, patients underwent titration to a stable dose of immediate-release hydromorphone (IRH) for 48 hours, and were then randomized to receive IRH or SRH for 5 days in a double-blind basis. During day 6, a crossover took place, and patients received the alternate drug for 5 days. Pain intensity was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) and ordinal scale (OS). Side effects were assessed using VAS. Patients and investigators made a blinded global rating of efficacy a blinded final choice between SRH and IRH.

RESULTS

In 75 assessable patients, pain intensity of the VAS and OS were (mean +/- SD) 27 +/- 21 and 1.3 +/- 0.6 on IRH, versus 29 +/- 21 (P = .13) and 1.3 +/- 0.6 (P = .19) on SRH, respectively. The total number of extra doses of opioids, global rating, and final blinded choice by both patients and investigators were not significantly different between IRH and SRH. Differences in side effects were not significant.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that SRH is as safe and effective as IRH in the treatment of cancer pain.

摘要

目的

评估一种新型氢吗啡酮缓释制剂(SRH)治疗癌痛的安全性和有效性。

患者与方法

来自加拿大三个姑息治疗中心的95名无精神障碍证据的成年患者接受口服阿片类镇痛药治疗癌痛。在获得知情同意后,患者接受48小时的即释氢吗啡酮(IRH)滴定至稳定剂量,然后随机分为双盲接受IRH或SRH治疗5天。在第6天进行交叉,患者接受另一种药物治疗5天。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和序数量表(OS)评估疼痛强度。使用VAS评估副作用。患者和研究者对疗效进行盲法整体评分,在SRH和IRH之间进行盲法最终选择。

结果

在75名可评估患者中,IRH治疗时VAS和OS的疼痛强度分别为(均值±标准差)27±21和1.3±0.6,SRH治疗时分别为29±21(P = 0.13)和1.3±0.6(P = 0.19)。IRH和SRH之间阿片类药物额外剂量的总数、整体评分以及患者和研究者的最终盲法选择均无显著差异。副作用差异不显著。

结论

我们的研究结果表明,SRH在治疗癌痛方面与IRH一样安全有效。

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验