Improving Study Conduct and Data Quality in Clinical Trials of Chronic Pain Treatments: IMMPACT Recommendations.

The estimated probability of progressing from phase 3 analgesic clinical trials to regulatory approval is approximately 57%, suggesting that a considerable number of treatments with phase 2 trial results deemed sufficiently successful to progress to phase 3 do not yield positive phase 3 results. Deficiencies in the quality of clinical trial conduct could account for some of this failure. An Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials meeting was convened to identify potential areas for improvement in trial conduct in order to improve assay sensitivity (ie, ability of trials to detect a true treatment effect). We present recommendations based on presentations and discussions at the meeting, literature reviews, and iterative revisions of this article. The recommendations relate to the following areas: 1) study design (ie, to promote feasibility), 2) site selection and staff training, 3) participant selection and training, 4) treatment adherence, 5) data collection, and 6) data and study monitoring. Implementation of these recommendations may improve the quality of clinical trial data and thus the validity and assay sensitivity of clinical trials. Future research regarding the effects of these strategies will help identify the most efficient use of resources for conducting high quality clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Every effort should be made to optimize the quality of clinical trial data. This manuscript discusses considerations to improve conduct of pain clinical trials based on research in multiple medical fields and the expert consensus of pain researchers and stakeholders from academia, regulatory agencies, and industry.

Disproportionality analysis of buprenorphine transdermal system and cardiac arrhythmia using FDA and WHO postmarketing reporting system data.

OBJECTIVE: Positive-controlled clinical studies have shown a dose dependent effect of buprenorphine transdermal system on QTc interval prolongation. This study provides assessment of the buprenorphine transdermal system and cardiac arrhythmia using US FDA and WHO postmarketing reporting databases. METHODS: Disproportionality analysis of spontaneously reported adverse events to assess whether the reporting rate of cardiac arrhythmia events was disproportionately elevated relative to expected rates of reporting in both FDA and WHO databases. Cardiac arrhythmia events were identified using the standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities query for torsade de pointes and/or QT prolongation (TdP/QTP). The threshold for a signal of disproportionate adverse event reporting was defined as the lower 90% confidence limit ≥ 2 of the Empiric Bayes geometric mean in FDA database and as the lower 95% confidence limit of the Informational Component >0 in WHO database. RESULTS: There were 124 (<1%) and 77 (2%) cardiac arrhythmia event cases associated with buprenorphine transdermal as compared to 3206 (12%) and 2913 (14%) involving methadone in the FDA and WHO databases, respectively. In the FDA database methadone was associated with a signal of disproportionate reporting for TdP/QTP (EB05 3.26); however, buprenorphine transdermal was not (EB05 0.33). In the WHO database methadone was associated with a signal of disproportionate reporting for TdP/QTP (IC025 2.66); however, buprenorphine transdermal was not (IC025 -0.88). Similar trends were observed in sensitivity analyses by age, gender, and specific terms related to ventricular arrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: The signal identified in the transdermal buprenorphine thorough QTc study, which led to a dose limitation in its US label, does not translate into a signal of increased risk for cardiac arrhythmia in real world use, as assessed by this method of analyzing post-market surveillance data.

Comparison of abuse, suspected suicidal intent, and fatalities related to the 7-day buprenorphine transdermal patch versus other opioid analgesics in the National Poison Data System.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription opioid related abuse, suicide and death are significant public health problems. This study compares rates of poison center calls categorized as intentional abuse, suspected suicidal intent or fatality for the 7-day buprenorphine transdermal system/patch (BTDS) with other extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioids indicated for chronic pain. METHODS: Retrospective 24-month cohort study using National Poison Data System data from July 2012 through June 2014. BTDS was introduced in the United States in January 2011. Numbers and rates of calls of intentional abuse, suspected suicidal intent and fatalities were evaluated for BTDS, ER morphine, ER oxycodone, fentanyl patch, ER oxymorphone and methadone tablets/capsules, using prescription adjustment to account for community availability. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Absolute numbers and prescription-adjusted rates of intentional abuse and suspected suicidal intent with BTDS were significantly lower (p < .0001) than for all other ER/LA opioid analgesics examined. No fatalities associated with BTDS exposure were reported. CONCLUSION: This post-marketing evaluation of BTDS indicates infrequent poison center calls for intentional abuse and suspected suicidal intent events, suggesting lower rates of these risks with BTDS compared to other ER/LA opioids.

Reductions in reported deaths following the introduction of extended-release oxycodone (OxyContin) with an abuse-deterrent formulation.

PURPOSE: Abuse of opioid analgesics for their psychoactive effects is associated with a large number of fatalities. The effect of making opioid tablets harder to crush/dissolve on opioid-related fatalities has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of introducing extended-release oxycodone (ERO [OxyContin(®) ]) tablets containing physicochemical barriers to crushing/dissolving (reformulated ERO) on deaths reported to the manufacturer. METHODS: All spontaneous adverse event reports of death in the US reported to the manufacturer between 3Q2009 and 3Q2013 involving ERO were used. The mean numbers of deaths/quarter in the 3 years after reformulated ERO introduction were compared with the year before. Changes in the slope of trends in deaths were assessed using spline regression. Comparison groups consisted of non-fatal reports involving ERO and fatality reports involving ER morphine. RESULTS: Reports of death decreased 82% (95% CI: -89, -73) from the year before to the third year after (131 to 23 deaths per year) reformulation; overdose death reports decreased 87% (95% CI: -93, -78) and overdose deaths with mention of abuse-related behavior decreased 86% (95% CI:-92, -75). In contrast, non-fatal ERO reports did not decrease post-reformulation, and reported ER morphine fatalities remained unchanged. The ratio of ERO fatalities to all oxycodone fatalities decreased from 21% to 8% in the year pre-reformulation to the second year post-reformulation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings, when considered in the context of previously published studies using other surveillance systems, suggest that the abuse-deterrent characteristics of reformulated ERO have decreased the fatalities associated with its misuse/abuse. © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel-group, 5-week study of buprenorphine transdermal system in adults with osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, parallel-group, 35-day study in adults with osteoarthritis (OA) pain evaluated the analgesic efficacy and safety of buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) designed for 7-day wear. METHODS: Patients with OA pain inadequately controlled with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs or patients who had taken opioids for OA pain within the past year entered a 7-day run-in period during which they took ibuprofen only. Patients with pain > or = on a 0-10 scale had their ibuprofen discontinued and were randomized into a 28-day double-blinded period to receive either BTDS at 1 of 3 dose levels (5, 10, or 20 microg/b) or placebo. Doses were titrated to effectiveness over a period of 21 days and maintained for 7 days. No rescue medication was allowed during the study. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients who achieved treatment success, defined as a patient satisfaction score of good, very good, or excellent (on day 28 or at early discontinuation) for those who did not discontinue due to ineffective treatment. RESULTS: More BTDS-treated patients experienced treatment success than placebo TDS-treated patients (44 percent and 32 percent; odds ratio = 1.66, p = 0.036). Fewer patients taking BTDS titrated to the highest dose compared with placebo (p < 0.05). There were two serious adverse events (both in the placebo group) and no deaths. The most common (> or =5 percent) adverse events reported in BTDS-treated patients were nausea, headache, dizziness, somnolence, application site pruritus, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo, BTDS treatment was effective in treating patients with moderate to severe pain due to OA of the knee or hip. BTDS was well-tolerated.

Buprenorphine transdermal delivery system in adults with persistent noncancer-related pain syndromes who require opioid therapy: a multicenter, 5-week run-in and randomized, double-blind maintenance-of-analgesia study.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy and safety profile of buprenorphine transdermal delivery system (BTDS) and placebo in subjects with persistent noncancer-related pain who required opioid analgesics. METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study in adult subjects (age >/=18 years) with at least a 2-month history of noncancer-related pain for which they received oral opioid combination agents. The study employed a maintenance-of-analgesia, or randomized-withdrawal, design. During a 7- to 21-day open-label run-in phase, all subjects received BTDS, titrated as needed. Subjects who achieved stable pain control and were able to tolerate BTDS in the run-in phase were randomly assigned to continue BTDS at the dose achieved during the run-in phase or to receive placebo for up to 14 days. Acetaminophen 500-mg tablets were provided as escape (rescue) medication. Subjects completed the study on day 14 or when they met predefined criteria for ineffective treatment: requiring >1 g of acetaminophen as escape medication on any day of the double-blind evaluation phase, requiring a change in study drug dose, having difficulty keeping the patch affixed, or discontinuing because of ineffective treatment without meeting any of the first 3 criteria. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of subjects with ineffective treatment. Secondary efficacy variables were the time to ineffective treatment; the proportion of subjects who reached ineffective treatment or discontinued for any reason other than ineffective treatment; and the amount of escape medication used. Assessment of the safety profile was based on adverse events and changes in vital signs and physical and laboratory findings. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-eight subjects entered the open-label run-in phase, and 267 (129 BTDS, 138 placebo) were subsequently randomized to doubleblind treatment. Demographic characteristics were similar between the double-blind BTDS and placebo groups (61.2% and 63.8% female, respectively; 99.2% and 98.6% white; mean [SD] age, 56.2 [13.3] and 59.2 [11.5] years). In the primary efficacy analysis, the proportion of subjects with ineffective treatment was lower with BTDS than with placebo (51.2% vs 65.0%; 95% CI, 1.09-2.95); the odds of ineffective treatment were 1.79 times greater for placebo relative to BTDS (P = 0.022). In the secondary efficacy analyses, the median time from the first dose of double-blind study drug to ineffective treatment was significantly longer with BTDS than with placebo (median, 10 vs 3 days; P = 0.011). The proportion of subjects who reached ineffective treatment or discontinued for reasons other than ineffective treatment was lower in the BTDS group compared with the placebo group (55.0% vs 67.9%); the odds of ineffective treatment or discontinuation for a reason other than ineffective treatment was 1.76 times greater with placebo compared with BTDS (P = 0.028). The mean amount of escape medication used was significantly lower in the BTDS group than in the placebo group (1.7 vs 2.2 acetaminophen tablets per day; P = 0.015). The most common adverse events in the open-label run-in or double-blind phase occurring at a higher incidence with BTDS than with placebo were pruritus at the patch application site (9.3% vs 5.1%, respectively), headache (3.9% vs 2.2%), and somnolence (2.3% vs 0.7%). CONCLUSION: In this population of adult subjects with persistent noncancer-related pain who required opioid therapy, BTDS use was associated with analgesic efficacy and was generally well tolerated. Results of this study were presented in part at the annual meeting of the American Pain Society, March 30-April 2, 2005, Boston, Massachusetts.