Tramadol: Does it have a role in cancer pain management?

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric E. Prommer, MD
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
The World ◽  
Dual Mechanism

Tramadol (Ultram, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., Raritan, NJ) is considered a Step 2 analgesic under the World Health Organization’s guidelines for the treatment of patients with cancer pain. It is a centrally acting analgesic that has affinity for opioid receptors and influences the action of norepinephrine and serotonin at the synapse. This dual mechanism of analgesia makes it unique among Step 2 agents. It is metabolized by CYP2D6, which increases the potential for drug interactions. Unlike other opioids, it does not cause respiratory depression. Tramadol has been studied in cancer pain and neuropathic pain. It compares well with low-dose morphine as an analgesic. The purpose of this review is to critically examine the pharmacodynamics, pharmacology, drug interactions, and adverse effects of the drug, and, based on the data presented, discuss the drug’s role in cancer care.

Interventional Therapies for Cancer Pain Management: Important Adjuvants to Systemic Analgesics

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 851-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Eidelman ◽  
Traci White ◽  
Robert A. Swarm
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Control Pain ◽  
Interventional Therapies

Optimized use of systemic analgesics fails to adequately control pain in some patients with cancer. Commonly used analgesics, including opioids, nonopioids (acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), and adjuvant analgesics (anticonvulsants and antidepressants), have limited analgesic efficacy, and their use is often associated with adverse effects. Without adequate pain control, patients with cancer not only experience the anguish of poorly controlled pain but also have greatly diminished quality of life and may even have reduced life expectancy. Interventional pain therapies are a diverse set of procedural techniques for controlling pain that may be useful when systemic analgesics fail to provide adequate control of cancer pain or when the adverse effects of systemic analgesics cannot be managed reasonably. Commonly used interventional therapies for cancer pain include neurolytic neural blockade, spinal administration of analgesics, and vertebroplasty. Compared with systemic analgesics, which generally have broad indications for control of pain, individual interventional therapies generally have specific, narrow indications. When appropriately selected and implemented, interventional pain therapies are important components of broad, multimodal cancer pain management that significantly increases the proportion of patients able to experience adequate pain control.

scholarly journals Cannabidiol Adverse Effects and Toxicity

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. 974-989 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn A. Huestis ◽  
Renata Solimini ◽  
Simona Pichini ◽  
Roberta Pacifici ◽  
Jeremy Carlier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Developmental Toxicity ◽  
World Health ◽  
Fetal Mortality ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Epileptic Syndromes ◽  
The World ◽  
Preclinical And Clinical Studies

Background: Currently, there is a great interest in the potential medical use of cannabidiol (CBD), a non-intoxicating cannabinoid. Productive pharmacological research on CBD occurred in the 1970s and intensified recently with many discoveries about the endocannabinoid system. Multiple preclinical and clinical studies led to FDA-approval of Epidiolex®, a purified CBD medicine formulated for oral administration for the treatment of infantile refractory epileptic syndromes, by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2018. The World Health Organization considers rescheduling cannabis and cannabinoids. CBD use around the world is expanding for diseases that lack scientific evidence of the drug’s efficacy. Preclinical and clinical studies also report adverse effects (AEs) and toxicity following CBD intake. Methods: Relevant studies reporting CBD’s AEs or toxicity were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Central, and EMBASE through January 2019. Studies defining CBD’s beneficial effects were included to provide balance in estimating risk/benefit. Results: CBD is not risk-free. In animals, CBD AEs included developmental toxicity, embryo-fetal mortality, central nervous system inhibition and neurotoxicity, hepatocellular injuries, spermatogenesis reduction, organ weight alterations, male reproductive system alterations, and hypotension, although at doses higher than recommended for human pharmacotherapies. Human CBD studies for epilepsy and psychiatric disorders reported CBD-induced drug-drug interactions, hepatic abnormalities, diarrhea, fatigue, vomiting, and somnolence. Conclusion: CBD has proven therapeutic efficacy for serious conditions such as Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut syndromes and is likely to be recommended off label by physicians for other conditions. However, AEs and potential drug-drug interactions must be taken into consideration by clinicians prior to recommending off-label CBD.

How Do Hospital Palliative Care Teams Use the WHO Guidelines to Manage Unrelieved Cancer Pain? A 1-Year, Multicenter Audit in Japan

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tetsusuke Yoshimoto ◽  
Shiro Tomiyasu ◽  
Toshinari Saeki ◽  
Tomohiro Tamaki ◽  
Takahiro Hashizume ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
World Health ◽  
Who Guidelines ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Palliative Care Teams ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Attention To Detail

It has been reported that pain relief for patients with cancer is suboptimal in Japan. This has been mainly attributed to inadequate dissemination of the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for cancer pain management. To better understand this problem, we reviewed how 6 hospital palliative care teams (HPCTs) used the WHO guidelines for unrelieved pain in a 1-year audit that included 534 patients. The HPCT interventions were classified according to the contents of the WHO guidelines. In our study, HPCT interventions involved opioid prescriptions in >80% of referred patients, and “For the Individual” and “Attention to Detail” were the 2 most important principles. Our study indicates which parts of the WHO guidelines should be most heavily emphasized, when disseminating them in Japan.

Pain management

2020 ◽  
pp. 629-633
Author(s):  
Marie Fallon
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Daily Functioning ◽  
Opioid Analgesia ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Good Pain Relief

Pain occurs in more than 50% of patients with advanced disease, interferes with daily functioning and quality of life, and is very often undertreated. Patients can find it difficult to articulate the character of their pains, but it is important to determine whether it is somatic, neuropathic, or visceral since this has important implications for management. For most patients with cancer pain, a three-step approach combining simple or opioid analgesia (depending on severity) along with an adjuvant analgesic (depending on cause) will result in good pain relief, but the challenge is to achieve good pain relief without unacceptable adverse effects.

Amitriptyline in Neuropathic Cancer Pain in Patients on Morphine Therapy: A Randomized Placebo-controlled, Double-blind Crossover Study

2002 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiano Mercadante ◽  
Edoardo Arcuri ◽  
Walter Tirelli ◽  
Patrizia Villari ◽  
Alessandra Casuccio
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

Aims and Background Amitriptyline is the most common analgesic adjuvant used in cancer patients with neuropathic pain, even though no specific studies have demonstrated a benefit. A randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover study was designed to evidence the effects of amitriptyline in patients with neuropathic cancer pain. Methods Sixteen advanced cancer patients with neuropathic pain on systemic morphine therapy, no longer receiving oncologic treatment, presenting moderate pain (about 4 or more, but less than 7, on a numerical scale of 0-10) in the last week, and given a stable morphine dose in the last 2 days were admitted to the study. During the first week of study, patients were administered 25 mg of amitriptyline or equivalent drops of placebo at night for 3 days and 50 mg for the following 4 days. Doses for patients aged more than 65 years were 15 mg (first 3 days) and 30 mg (3 days after). After a week, a crossover took place for the second week, with the other treatment at an inverse sequence. Opioid consumption, pain intensity, symptoms and adverse effects, mood, sleep, patient's preference, quality of life before starting the study, the first week after and the second week after were recorded. Results No significant benefits in analgesia were found in the global pain intensity of the previous week of treatment, the least pain intensity or the pain evaluated just after a week of treatment, at the moment of the visit, when amitriptyline was compared with placebo. A significant difference was evidenced for the worst pain (P < 0.035). No differences in opioid doses during the period of study were found. Drowsiness, confusion and dry mouth were significantly more intense with amitriptyline than with placebo (P < 0.036, 0.003, and 0.034, respectively). There were no substantial differences between the two treatments in Spitzer's quality of life score and for each item. No differences in patients' preference for the two treatment periods were found. The analgesic effects of amitriptyline were slight and associated with adverse effects. Conclusions In light of the results obtained in the study, the extensive use of the drug for cancer pain should be questioned.

scholarly journals Using Intradermal Rabies Vaccine to Boost Immunity in People with Low Rabies Antibody Levels

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Brown ◽  
Anthony R. Fooks ◽  
Martin Schweiger
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Vaccine Dose ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
Rabies Vaccine ◽  
World Health ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
The World ◽  
Antibody Titres ◽  
Antibody Levels

Intradermal rabies vaccine is recommended by the World Health Organisation, but not all countries, including England, follow this recommendation. A group of 12 adults in England previously given pre-exposure intradermal rabies vaccine were considered to be non-immune to rabies because their rabies antibody titres were known to be less than 0.5 IU/mL. A cohort study examined the immunizing effect of increasing the participants' cumulative dose of intradermal rabies to 2.0 IU. All patients subsequently demonstrated rabies antibody levels >0.5 IU⋅mL supporting evidence of adequate sero-conversion. No adverse effects of intradermal rabies vaccine boosting were noted. Within the limits of a small study the findings support the hypothesis that adequate levels of rabies antibody can be achieved by a schedule of intradermal injections delivered on at least three occasions with a cumulative rabies vaccine dose of 2.0 IU.

Opioid Rotation for Toxicity Reduction (DRAFT)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Cecilia Tenorio ◽  
Akhila Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Clinical Case ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Opioid Rotation ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
Study Intervention ◽  
Morphine Equivalent

This chapter discusses the de Stoutz et al. retrospective review of patients with cancer pain who developed dose-limiting toxicities and underwent opioid rotation that resulted in improvement of symptoms related to opioid induced neurotoxicity, uncontrolled pain, and reduction in morphine equivalent daily dose. This study is the first to establish that opioid rotation, which is substituting one opioid with another using established equianalgesic conversion ratios, is a valuable tool in cancer pain management. This chapter describes the basics of the study, including funding, year study began, year study was published, study location, who was studied, who was excluded, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, gives a summary and discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document