Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 55(2): 179-188.e1, 2018 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28923526

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: Prior Phase 2/3 studies found that cannabinoids might provide adjunctive analgesia in advanced cancer patients with uncontrolled pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess adjunctive nabiximols (Sativex®), an extract of Cannabis sativa containing two potentially therapeutic cannabinoids (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol [27 mg/mL] and cannabidiol [25 mg/mL]), in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy. METHODS: Phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in patients with advanced cancer and average pain Numerical Rating Scale scores ≥4 and ≤8 despite optimized opioid therapy. Patients randomized to nabiximols (n = 199) or placebo (n = 198) self-titrated study medications over a two-week period, followed by a three-week treatment period at the titrated dose. RESULTS: Median percent improvements in average pain Numerical Rating Scale score from baseline to end of treatment in the nabiximols and placebo groups were 10.7% vs. 4.5% (P = 0.0854) in the intention-to-treat population (primary variable) and 15.5% vs. 6.3% (P = 0.0378) in the per-protocol population. Nabiximols was statistically superior to placebo on two of three quality-of-life instruments at Week 3 and on all three at Week 5. In exploratory post hoc analyses, U.S. patients, but not patients from the rest of the world, experienced significant benefits from nabiximols on multiple secondary endpoints. Possible contributing factors to differences in nabiximols efficacy include: 1) the U.S. participants received lower doses of opioids at baseline than the rest of the world and 2) the subgroups had different distribution of cancer pain types, which may have been related to differences in pathophysiology of pain. The safety profile of nabiximols was consistent with earlier studies. CONCLUSIONS: Although not superior to placebo on the primary efficacy endpoint, nabiximols had benefits on multiple secondary endpoints, particularly in the U.S. PATIENTS: Nabiximols might have utility in patients with advanced cancer who receive a lower opioid dose, such as individuals with early intolerance to opioid therapy.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/administration & dosage , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cannabidiol/administration & dosage , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Dronabinol/administration & dosage , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Chronic Pain/etiology , Double-Blind Method , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oral Sprays , Pain Measurement , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome
2.
Br J Pain ; 11(3): 119-133, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28785408

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Opioids are critical for managing cancer pain, but may provide inadequate relief and/or unacceptable side effects in some cases. OBJECTIVE: To assess the analgesic efficacy of adjunctive Sativex (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (27 mg/mL): cannabidiol (25 mg/mL)) in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy. METHODS: This report describes two phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Eligible patients had advanced cancer and average pain numerical rating scale (NRS) scores ≥4 and ≤8 at baseline, despite optimized opioid therapy. In Study-1, patients were randomized to Sativex or placebo, and then self-titrated study medications over a 2-week period per effect and tolerability, followed by a 3-week treatment period. In Study-2, all patients self-titrated Sativex over a 2-week period. Patients with a ≥15% improvement from baseline in pain score were then randomized 1:1 to Sativex or placebo, followed by 5-week treatment period (randomized withdrawal design). RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint (percent improvement (Study-1) and mean change (Study-2) in average daily pain NRS scores) was not met in either study. Post hoc analyses of the primary endpoints identified statistically favourable treatment effect for Sativex in US patients <65 years (median treatment difference: 8.8; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.00-17.95; p = 0.040) that was not observed in patients <65 years from the rest of the world (median treatment difference: 0.2; 95% CI: -5.00 to 7.74; p = 0.794). Treatment effect in favour of Sativex was observed on quality-of-life questionnaires, despite the fact that similar effects were not observed on NRS score. The safety profile of Sativex was consistent with earlier studies, and no evidence of abuse or misuse was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Sativex did not demonstrate superiority to placebo in reducing self-reported pain NRS scores in advanced cancer patients with chronic pain unalleviated by optimized opioid therapy, although further exploration of differences between United States and patients from the rest of the world is warranted.

3.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 75(2): 297-305, 2016 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27189825

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Peripheral leukocytes in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have elevated phosphodiesterase-4 activity, which is associated with production of proinflammatory mediators. OPA-15406 is a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor with high selectivity for phosphodiesterase-4-B. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess effectiveness and tolerability of topical OPA-15406 in patients with AD. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase-II study. Patients 10 to 70 years of age with mild or moderate AD received topical OPA-15406 0.3% (n = 41), OPA-15406 1% (n = 43), or vehicle (n = 37) twice daily for 8 weeks. RESULTS: The primary end point, Investigator Global Assessment of Disease Severity score of 0 or 1 with greater than or equal to 2-grade reduction, was met at week 4 in the OPA-15406 1% group (P = .0165 vs vehicle). Mean percentage improvement from baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index score for OPA-15406 1% was notable in week 1 (31.4% vs 6.0% for vehicle; P = .0005), even larger in week 2 (39.0% vs 3.0%; P = .0001), and persisted for 8 weeks. Visual analog scale pruritus scores improved from moderate to mild within the first week in the OPA-15406 1% group (36.4% mean change; P = .0011). OPA-15406 levels in blood were negligible. Incidence of adverse events was low, with most events mild in intensity. LIMITATIONS: Further confirmatory phase-III studies are required. CONCLUSION: OPA-15406 ointment may provide an effective therapeutic modality for patients with mild to moderate AD.


Subject(s)
Anisoles/therapeutic use , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Phosphodiesterase 4 Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Administration, Cutaneous , Adolescent , Adult , Anisoles/adverse effects , Anisoles/blood , Child , Dermatitis, Atopic/complications , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nitriles/adverse effects , Nitriles/blood , Phosphodiesterase 4 Inhibitors/adverse effects , Phosphodiesterase 4 Inhibitors/blood , Pruritus/drug therapy , Pruritus/etiology , Severity of Illness Index , Young Adult
4.
Ann Neurol ; 68(2): 145-50, 2010 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20695007

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of 4.5mg nightly naltrexone on the quality of life of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. METHODS: This single-center, double-masked, placebo-controlled, crossover study evaluated the efficacy of 8 weeks of treatment with 4.5mg nightly naltrexone (low-dose naltrexone, LDN) on self-reported quality of life of MS patients. RESULTS: Eighty subjects with clinically definite MS were enrolled, and 60 subjects completed the trial. Ten withdrew before completing the first trial period: 8 for personal reasons, 1 for a non-MS-related adverse event, and 1 for perceived benefit. Database management errors occurred in 4 other subjects, and quality of life surveys were incomplete in 6 subjects for unknown reasons. The high rate of subject dropout and data management errors substantially reduced the trial's statistical power. LDN was well tolerated, and serious adverse events did not occur. LDN was associated with significant improvement on the following mental health quality of life measures: a 3.3-point improvement on the Mental Component Summary score of the Short Form-36 General Health Survey (p = 0.04), a 6-point improvement on the Mental Health Inventory (p < 0.01), a 1.6-point improvement on the Pain Effects Scale (p =.04), and a 2.4-point improvement on the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (p = 0.05). INTERPRETATION: LDN significantly improved mental health quality of life indices. Further studies with LDN in MS are warranted.


Subject(s)
Mood Disorders/drug therapy , Mood Disorders/etiology , Multiple Sclerosis/complications , Multiple Sclerosis/psychology , Naltrexone/administration & dosage , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Quality of Life , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Over Studies , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , Pilot Projects , Placebos , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...