Brema F, Pastorino G, Martini M C, Gottlieb A, Luzzani M, Libretti A, Saccà L, Cigolari S
Tumour Centre, Ospedale San Paolo, Savona, Italy.
Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1996;16(4-5):109-16.
In this multicentre trial tramadol and buprenorphine were compared for the treatment of neoplastic pain no longer responsive to non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs. A total of 131 adults (86 M, 45F) were treated with tramadol (one 100-mg slow-release tablet every 8-12 h), or buprenorphine (one sublingual 0.2-mg tablet every 6-8 h). The trial was to continue for up to six months. Most patients started treatment with 2-3 tablets/day in both groups, and the mean treatment period was 58 days for tramadol and 51 for buprenorphine. Almost all dose changes needed were made in the first fortnight in both treatment groups, and the largest number of patients dropped out because of inadequate pain relief or progression of the underlying disease. The results achieved in the first two weeks persisted throughout the rest of the trial, and the investigator's assessments on each patient's clinical chart corresponded closely with those that patients made in their own daily diaries. In the four hours after the first dose both drugs virtually halved the severity of pain (measured using a visual analogue scale), and this relief lasted throughout treatment. By the end of the first week the proportion of patients with strong/unbearable pain in the tramadol group had fallen significantly (from 98.4% to 48.1%, p < 0.05), as compared to a drop from 92% to 66.7% for buprenorphine. The quality of sleep also tended to improve in the tramadol group, with the proportion of patients enjoying good or deep sleep rising from 37% to 50%, as compared to 33% to 40-44% with buprenorphine. Karnofsky's and Spitzer's indices reflecting the quality of life did not change in the tramadol group; in the buprenorphine group the Karnofsky index dropped slightly after a fortnight (p < 0.05 between treatments). In the first two months of the trial the number of patients with no/moderate pain rose continuously in the tramadol group (71% and 80% after one and two months); the rise was less marked in the buprenorphine group (number of patients with mild/moderate pain, 45% and 65%). In both the short term and in the longer term, it was found that the levels of efficacy and acceptability were always significantly better in the tramadol group than in the buprenorphine group. General and biological safety in both drugs was good. The most typical side-effects were those characteristic of opioids (nausea and/or vomiting, drowsiness). Adverse reactions were reported in 17 patients taking tramadol (25%) and in 16 taking buprenorphine (26%). There were six drop-outs in the first group (9%) and seven in the second (11%). Serious symptoms arose more frequently in the buprenorphine group (19% cf. 10%). No signs of dependence or tolerance were noted.
在这项多中心试验中,比较了曲马多和丁丙诺啡对不再对非甾体抗炎药产生反应的肿瘤性疼痛的治疗效果。共有131名成年人(86名男性,45名女性)接受了曲马多(每8 - 12小时服用一片100毫克缓释片)或丁丙诺啡(每6 - 8小时舌下含服一片0.2毫克片剂)治疗。该试验持续长达六个月。两组大多数患者开始治疗时每天服用2 - 3片,曲马多组的平均治疗期为58天,丁丙诺啡组为51天。两个治疗组几乎所有必要的剂量调整都在头两周内进行,因疼痛缓解不足或基础疾病进展而退出的患者最多。前两周取得的结果在试验剩余时间内持续存在,研究者对每位患者临床记录的评估与患者自己日常日记中的评估密切相符。首次给药后四小时内,两种药物实际上都使疼痛严重程度减半(使用视觉模拟量表测量),且这种缓解在整个治疗过程中持续。到第一周结束时,曲马多组中疼痛强烈/难以忍受的患者比例显著下降(从98.4%降至48.1%,p < 0.05),而丁丙诺啡组从92%降至66.7%。曲马多组睡眠质量也趋于改善,享受良好或深度睡眠的患者比例从37%升至50%,而丁丙诺啡组为33%至40 - 44%。反映生活质量的卡诺夫斯基指数和斯皮策指数在曲马多组未改变;丁丙诺啡组在两周后卡诺夫斯基指数略有下降(治疗组间p < 0.05)。在试验的前两个月,曲马多组无/中度疼痛的患者数量持续上升(一个月和两个月后分别为71%和80%);丁丙诺啡组上升幅度较小(轻度/中度疼痛患者数量为45%和65%)。短期和长期来看,发现曲马多组的疗效和可接受性水平始终显著优于丁丙诺啡组。两种药物的总体和生物学安全性良好。最典型的副作用是阿片类药物的特征性副作用(恶心和/或呕吐、嗜睡)。服用曲马多的17名患者(25%)和服用丁丙诺啡的16名患者(26%)报告了不良反应。第一组有6名患者退出(9%),第二组有7名患者退出(11%)。严重症状在丁丙诺啡组出现得更频繁(19%对比10%)。未发现依赖或耐受迹象。