Tilidine and dipyrone (metamizole) in cold pressor pain: A pooled analysis of efficacy, tolerability, and safety in healthy volunteers.

The cold pressor test (CPT) is widely implemented and offers a simple, experimental acute pain model utilizing cold pain. Previous trials have frequently paired the CPT with opioids in order to investigate the mechanisms underlying pharmacological analgesia, due to their known analgesic efficacy. However, opioid side effects may lead to unblinding and raise concerns about the safety of the experimental setting. Despite the established clinical efficacy of dipyrone (metamizole), its efficacy, tolerability, and safety in cold pressor pain has not been systematically addressed to date. This pooled analysis included data of 260 healthy volunteers from three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind substudies using the CPT following a pre-test-post-test-design. These substudies allow for comparing a single dose of 800 mg dipyrone with two different doses of the opioid tilidine/naloxone (50/4 mg and 100/8 mg, respectively). Outcomes included pain intensity ratings, pain tolerance, medication-attributed side effects, as well as changes of blood pressure and heart rate. We demonstrate that both opioid doses and dipyrone had a comparable, significant analgesic effect on cold pressor pain. However, dipyrone was associated with significantly less self-reported adverse effects and these were not significantly different from those under placebo. These results indicate that the combination of dipyrone and the CPT provides a safe, tolerable, and effective experimental model for the study of pharmacological analgesia. In combination with a CPT, dipyrone may be useful as a positive control, or baseline medication for the study of analgesic modulation.

[Basic Knowledge of Drug Pain Therapy in the Palliative Situation]. / Basiswissen zur medikamentösen Schmerztherapie in der Palliativsituation.

This review provides an overview of the basic knowledge of drug pain therapy in the palliative situation. Pain is one of the main symptoms in 60 to 90 % of cancer patients. Pain also develops with neurological and other diseases that occur in end-of-life situations. To address this symptom, a holistic strategy is required that encompasses all physical, psychological, social, and spiritual aspects of the multi-dimensional pain experience ("total pain" concept).Drug treatment for cancer pain has been based on a stepwise approach for many years, starting with non-opioid analgesics, followed by moderate and strong opioids. In contrast, today's pain management is determined more by the actual intensity of this aversive event.The pain assessment should be tailored to identify a nociceptive vs. neuropathic pain component that needs to be challenged by the most appropriate drug therapies. Non-opioid analgesics are ideal substances for relieving nociceptive pain. Antidepressants and anticonvulsants reduce the intensity of new neuropathic pain. Opioids are suitable for all types of pain, but are restricted to a second line choice. Among all opioids are tilidine and tramadol prodrugs, which only relieve pain after activation in the liver. Drug-drug interactions may also block this activation. Rapid release opioids should be used for cancer breakthrough pain. Transdermal opioid applications are recommended for swallowing disorders, but usually not to initiate pain control. An opioid switch can be performed if side effects such as hallucinations for the selected opioid are more pronounced than the pain reduction.

Cardiovascular disorders associated with naloxone monotherapy and in fixed-dose combination with opioids: Data from international safety surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The widespread use of opioids has resulted in sharp rise of associated complications, particularly opioid-induced constipation (OIC). Opioid receptor antagonists have been proposed to treat OIC, but could precipitate rapid opioid withdrawal. As cardiovascular safety data are lacking, we assessed disproportionate reporting of adverse cardiac events associated with naloxone across large, international pharmacovigilance systems. METHODS: Post-marketing data from the World Health Organization (WHO) and FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) were evaluated for naloxone and the synthetic opioids oxycodone and tilidine. The proportional reporting ratio (PRR), a measure of reporting frequency analogous to an odds ratio, was assessed. The primary outcome was reporting frequency of the MedDRA System Organ Class (SOC) 'Cardiac Disorders' for naloxone alone and in fixed-dose combination with opioids. Opioid mono-preparations served as quasi-experimental controls. A PRR greater than 2.0 was considered significant. RESULTS: In total, 14,827,374 million adverse drug event reports were reviewed. In WHO, there were 1757 reports of SOC cardiac disorders among 10,866 total reports for oxycodone (PRR 2.38 [95% CI 2.28-2.49, χ(2)=1504]). For oxycodone-naloxone, there were 43/453 reports of SOC cardiac disorders (PRR 1.45 [95% CI 1.09-1.92, χ(2)=6.4]). For the synthetic opioid tilidine there were 13/179 reports (PRR 1.13 [95% CI 0.67-1.91, χ(2)=0.2]) and for tilidine-naloxone, 30/505 reports (PRR 0.92 [95% CI 0.65-1.31, χ(2)=0.2]). In FAERS, the PRR for SOC cardiac disorders was 0.95 [95% CI 0.89-1.01, χ(2)=2.1] for naloxone (all administration routes) and 1.16 [95% CI 0.93-1.45, χ(2)=1.3] for naloxone (oral only). In comparison, the PRR was 1.66 [95% CI 1.63-1.69, χ(2)=4278] for oxycodone and 1.52 [CI 1.28-1.80, χ(2)=1500] for oxycodone-naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: Available pharmacovigilance data do not suggest disproportionate reporting of adverse cardiovascular events for opioid antagonists used to treat OIC.

Topical review on the abuse and misuse potential of tramadol and tilidine in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Tramadol and tilidine (in combination with naloxone) are used as weak opioid analgesics in Germany. Tramadol is not scheduled in the German Narcotic Drugs Act. Tilidine is scheduled, whereas Tilidine in fixed combinations with naloxone is exempt from some of the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs Act. Recent reports on misuse of both substances led to an evaluation of their potential for misuse, abuse, and dependency by the expert advisory committee established by the German Federal Government, resident at the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices. METHODS: A subcommittee formulated key questions and identified available data sources for each of these questions. Additional information was solicited where necessary, including a survey among a panel of pharmacists, a survey in an addiction clinic, analysis of prescription patterns, and information from the boards of pharmacists of the federal states and the Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigation. RESULTS: Analgesic efficiency in the treatment of acute and chronic pain has been proven for both tramadol and tilidine/naloxone. For tramadol, high evidence has been confirmed in systematic reviews, and tramadol is listed in national and international guidelines on acute and chronic pain management. Animal and human studies found a low potential for misuse, abuse, and dependency for both substances. Information from 2 tramadol safety databases allowed calculation of the incidence of abuse or dependency as 0.21 and 0.12 cases per million defined daily dosages (DDDs), with lower incidences in recent years. For tilidine/naloxone, the incidence was calculated as 0.43 cases per million DDDs for oral solution and 0.18 for slow-release tablets. In an online survey among German pharmacies as well as in the reports from state pharmacy boards, fraud attempts were repeated more frequently with tilidine/naloxone than with tramadol in the last 2 years. The Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations reported prescription fraud only with tilidine/naloxone and predominantly in the region of Berlin. Dependency on tramadol or tilidine/naloxone is reported only rarely from addiction counseling centers. One third of the patients surveyed in an addiction clinic reported experiences with tramadol or tilidine/naloxone, but mostly with duration of less than 4 weeks and with a medical prescription based on a reasonable indication. Also, occasional illegal use of opioid analgesics as a substitute of heroin was reported. An evaluation of pooled data from statutory health insurance companies found 2.5% of persons receiving at least 1 prescription of tramadol or the combination of tilidine and naloxone in 2009 (1.6% with tramadol and 1.0% with tilidine/naloxone). High usage with more than 180 DDDs per year was found in 8.6% of patients treated with tramadol and 17.2% of patients with tilidine/naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the subcommittee of the expert advisory committee found a low potential for misuse, abuse, and dependency for tramadol, and a low prevalence in clinical practice. Considerable less information is available for the combination of tilidine and naloxone. However, the cumulation of evidence indicated a higher risk of misuse, abuse, and dependency for tilidine/naloxone solution, but not for slow-release tablets.

[Chronic non-cancer-related pain. Long-term treatment with rapid-release and short-acting opioids in the context of misuse and dependency]. / Chronische nichttumorbedingte Schmerzen. Langzeitbehandlung mit schnell freisetzenden und kurz wirksamen Opioiden im Kontext von Missbrauch und Abhängigkeit.

Annually published data show a continual increase in the volume of opioid prescriptions in Germany, thus indicating an intensification of opioid therapy. The majority of opioids are prescribed to treat chronic non-cancer-related pain. On the basis of current guidelines, as well as in terms of the lack of data regarding long-term use of opioids and their effectiveness beyond a period of 3 months, this development must be viewed critically. With reference to four case reports, we discuss and evaluate opioid therapy in relation to medication misuse and the development of drug dependency. Particular emphasis is placed on the administration of rapid-release and short-acting opioid preparations, which we consider to be particularly problematic.

[The transdermal 7-day buprenorphine patch--an effective and safe treatment option, if tramadol or tilidate/naloxone is insufficient. Results of a non-interventional study]. / 7-Tage-Pflaster mit Buprenorphin--eine Option, wenn die Therapie mit Tramadol bzw. Tilidin/Naloxon unzureichend ist. Ergebnisse einer nicht interventionellen Studie.

The transdermal 7-day buprenorphine matrix patch provides a constant and user-friendly pain management when chronic musculoskeletal pain requires opioids. This analysis of clinical routine data evaluated the benefit of this treatment for patients previously receiving oral long-term treatment with weak opioids alone. Data of 310 patients previously treated with tramadol or tildate/naloxone and part of a multicentre observational study with 3295 patients were analyzed. In 89.7% of the 310 patients oral treatment with weak opioids was replaced by the 7-day buprenorphine patch due to insufficient analgesia. During treatment with the 7-day buprenorphine patch there was a clinically significant decrease of the mean pain intensity at rest during the day from 5.7 to 2.9, on physical effort during the day from 7.3 to 3.8 and at night from 5.2 to 2.3 (11-point NRS scale, p < or = 0.001). In addition, quality of life aspects such as mobility, self-reliance and quality of sleep improved, which are relevant for individual patient satisfaction with pain management. For patients with previous long-term tramadol or tilidate/naloxone treatment the switch to the 7-day buprenorphine matrix patch proved to be effective and safe for the management of chronic pain. The user-friendly 7-day application interval contributes to improving compliance and a reducing exposure to tablets.

[Postoperative pain therapy with tilidin and tilidin retard as an oral patient-controlled analgesia after uncomplicated myocardial revascularization]. / Die postoperative Schmerztherapie mit Valoron-N-Lösung und Valoron-N-retard. Tabletten als orales Patienten-kontrolliertes Analgesieverfahren nach herzchirurgischen Routine-Bypassoperationen.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether or not the combination of tilidin and tilidin retard as oral patient-controlled analgesia provide a suitable pain management in patients after uncomplicated myocardial revascularization. METHODS: We conducted a randomised phase IV study to evaluate the effectiveness of postoperative analgesia with tilidin and tilidin retard. Patients with a baseline tilidin retard and tilidin liquid demand medication (group B, 42 patients) were compared with a base line paracetamol and tramadol-HCl liquid demand medication (group A, 44 patients). All patients received the first dose of study medication at the second postoperative day after evaluation of the individual pain score using NRS (numeric rating scale). RESULTS: Pain relief in group B was significantly better only at the second postoperative day (NRS 1,8 compared to 3,3 in group A), associated with tolerable side effects and comfortable handling. CONCLUSION: The combination of sustained release with immediate release drugs as a patient controlled analgesia provides suitable and comfortable analgesia after myocardial bypass surgery.

[Tilidine/naloxon retard in long-term administration in chronic pain and multimorbidity. Multicenter study of long-term tolerance and effectiveness in 2 years observation]. / Tilidin/Naloxon retard zur Langzeitanwendung bei chronischen Schmerzen und Multimorbidität. Multizenterstudie zur Langzeitverträglichkeit und Wirksamkeit bei zweijähriger Beobachtung.

BACKGROUND AND METHOD: 335 patients (51% female, 49% male, mean age 56 years) with chronic pain and multimorbidity have been included in a multi-center 2-years' study with slow release Tilidine/Naloxone for efficacy and safety which included detailed laboratory examinations. 316 patients had already been treated with analgesics. 159 patients (47.5%) finished the study as planned, 176 patients finished the study earlier. RESULTS: Parameters of quality of life such as persistent pain, sleep, mood and activity have improved. Tolerance has not been observed. In 85 patients (25%) adverse events had occurred (nausea, vomiting, dizziness) which are related to the study-medication. Constipation was documented in only 4 patients. After 2 years of therapy with Tilidine/Naloxone there has been no relevant changes in laboratory findings. There has been no sign of organ damage or interactions with concomitant medication. CONCLUSION: Tilidine/Naloxone is an effective and safe analgesic (WHO II) suitable for the longterm treatment of patients with chronic pain.

Adverse effects of opioid analgesic treatment are correlated with a significant elevation in plasma epinephrine in healthy humans.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to elucidate the relationship of plasma catecholamine concentrations with experienced pain intensity and analgesic effects in the setting of an experimental pain study with human volunteers. METHODS: Plasma norepinephrine and epinephrine concentrations of 12 healthy human volunteers were analysed before and during painful electrical tooth-pulp stimulation under medication using the highly potent opioid analgesic tilidine in a fixed tilidine/naloxone combination and with the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent bromfenac. Catecholamine levels were compared with pharmacodynamic effects and reported adverse effects. RESULTS: Catecholamine levels revealed a statistically significant increase in plasma epinephrine concentrations (but not norepinephrine concentrations) 60-90 min after administration of tilidine/naloxone. This was correlated with the onset of adverse effects involving vertigo episodes in all reported cases. In contrast, there was no obvious correspondence of epinephrine or norepinephrine plasma concentrations to the experience of pain and analgesia. For comparison, under medication with the non-opioid analgesic bromfenac, only one mild adverse effects were noted, and no changes in plasma epinephrine or norepinephrine could be determined during the experimental sessions. CONCLUSIONS: It is proposed that elevated plasma epinephrine concentrations are a newly determined response to opioid-induced vertigo; this has possible clinical implications.

Effects of tramadol and tilidine/naloxone on oral-caecal transit and pupillary light reflex.

As has been demonstrated in binding studies the two opioids tilidine (CAS 27107-79-7)/naloxone (CAS 357-08-4) and tramadol (CAS 36282-47-0) differ in regard to their affinities to the opioid receptor site. Therefore it is of interest to evaluate whether such a difference in opioid affinity is also seen in the pharmacological effects of clinically relevant doses in man. Following institutional approval by the local ethical committee and informed consent, 12 volunteers received oral doses of tramadol (100 mg), tilidine/naloxone (100 mg) and placebo, respectively, in a randomized, double-blind cross-over design. In order to determine the degree of constipation, oral-caecal transit time was measured using the H2-exhalation test. Additionally, in order to evaluate a centrally mediated effect, the response of the pupil to light was quantified using the pupillary light reflex technique. Both, peripheral and central mediated effects were compared to placebo. Tramadol as well as tilidine/naloxone induced a significant (p < 0.05) prolongation of oral-caecal transit when compared to placebo. However, prolongation of oral-caecal transit was significantly longer in the tilidine/naloxone (p < 0.05) than in the tramadol group. Compared to tramadol, the pronounced constipating effect of tilidine/naloxone is likely to be due to the 10 fold higher affinity of that drug to the peripheral opioid receptor sites in the intestinal tract, which are responsible for normal propulsion. Such difference in binding is underlined by a central effect, the pupillary light reflex response. The amount of constriction of the iris to light was reduced after both opioids. Again, tilidine/naloxone significantly reduced (p < 0.001) the pupillary light reflex when compared to tramadol. Other side effects such as tiredness, nausea, emesis and dry mouth were more often reported after tilidine/naloxone than after tramadol (40% versus 15%; p < 0.05). Vertigo and perspiration were more often reported after tramadol than after after tilidine/naloxone (58% and 78% versus 8%; p < 0.01). All these data support the findings that while tramadol is considered an opioid, it does not mediate its main clinical relevant properties via binding at the opioid receptor. More likely, due to its monoaminergic reuptake mechanism, to a lesser extent opioid-like effects are induced.

Pharmacokinetics of nortilidine and naloxone after administration of tilidine/naloxone solution or tilidine/naloxone sustained release tablets.

Valoron N is a compound which consists of the prodrug tilidine (CAS 20380-58-9), from which the active metabolite nortilidine is formed by demethylation in the liver, and the opiate antagonist naloxone (CAS 465-65-6), which prevents the abuse of the analgesic by opiate dependents. The pharmacokinetics of nortilidine and naloxone were studied in 18 male healthy subjects after oral application of tilidine/naloxone solution or tilidine/naloxone retard tablets, respectively. The following report gives the results on investigations of a) dose linearity after application of 25 mg, 50 mg and 100 mg Valoron N solution, b) dose equivalence of Valoron N solution (4 x 50 mg tilidine) and Valoron N retard tablets (2 x 100 mg tilidine) under steady state conditions, and c) the equivalence of different dose strengths of Valoron N retard tablets (50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg tilidine/tablet). The results obtained in these studies demonstrate a dose linear kinetic for nortilidine after the application of 25 mg to 100 mg tilidine. Furthermore, there is dose equivalence between the tilidine/naloxone solution and tilidine/naloxone retard tablets, which permits the replacing of the solution with the retard tablets. Because of the equivalence of different dose strengths of Valoron N tablets, patients are able to exchange low dosed Valoron N retard tablets for higher-dosed ones (50 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg tilidine/tablet), if necessary. With their constant release of tilidine and the possibility for individual dosage, the retard tablets are efficient analgesics that improve pain therapy considerably for patients with chronic pain.

Comparison of tilidine/naloxone, tramadol and bromfenac in experimental pain: a double-blind randomized crossover study in healthy human volunteers.

AIM: The analgesic efficacy and safety of single oral doses of two centrally acting compounds, the combination of 50 mg tilidine and 4 mg naloxone (Valoron N) and 50 mg tramadol (Tramal), were compared to 25, 50 and 75 mg of the non-steroidal antiinflammatory bromfenac in experimental pain. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: It was a placebo-controlled double-blind 6-way crossover study design with 12 human volunteers. Acute pain was generated by electrical tooth pulp stimulation. Treatment effects were determined by recording somatosensory-evoked potentials and by subjective pain rating. RESULTS: The tilidine/naloxone combination clearly was the most potent medication in this study, followed by bromfenac 75 mg, which produced an early pain relief. Tramadol produced poor analgesia, as did bromfenac 25 and 50 mg. There was no dose-response relationship for bromfenac. Control of plasma levels revealed pronounced interindividual differences in peak plasma concentrations for bromfenac, but not for tramadol. Tilidine/naloxone exerted adverse effects in 9, tramadol in 3 volunteers. Under medication with 25 and 50 mg bromfenac, respectively, only one subject reported adverse effects. No adverse effects were experienced with 75 mg bromfenac or placebo. CONCLUSION: The results support previous conclusions about the analgesic efficacy of tilidine/naloxone and tramadol in experimental pain. Moreover, the findings suggest that 75 mg bromfenac might be suitable for fast but short relief of pain of non-inflammatory genesis.

[Long-term treatment of chronic pain with tilidine-naloxone. An analysis of 50 patients with chronic pain conditions of non-malignant origin]. / Langzeitbehandlung chronischer Schmerzen mit Tilidin-Naloxon. Eine Analyse an 50 Patienten mit chronischen Schmerzzuständen nichtmaligner Genese.

METHOD: 50 patients with incurable chronic pain states were treated for a period of between six months and 14 years (median: 31 months) with tilidine-naloxone, and the results of tumor recorded. Amelioration of pain was achieved in an average of 60.7% of the cases. The 16 patients of this series suffering from neuropathic pain who received a somewhat lower dose responded equally as well (60.3% amelioration) as the overall group. In 24 patients suffering from pain, the daily dose remained unchanged throughout the course of treatment, had to be increased in 19, and was reduced in seven patients. In two patients, acceptable side-effects were indicated; in no case were there any signs of drug-induced organic damage. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that tilidine-naloxone is a highly effective opioid analgesic with a remarkably favorable benefit-risk ratio for use in long-term treatment.

Comparative study of tilidine-naloxone and pentazocine in knee and hip osteoarthritis.

Fifty patients, twenty-five suffering from severe knee osteoarthritis and twenty-five from acute hip osteoarthritis, received pentazocine or a new preparation of tilidine-naloxone for a period of 2 weeks, in a double-blind study. The two drugs were found to have the same efficacy and tolerance in both diseases with a minor but not statistically significant superiority for tilidine-naloxone. Similar quantities of drugs were taken over the study period, while patients were allowed to take as many as 8 capsules per day to relieve pain. There were quite equivalent side-effects and no marked changes in laboratory tests.

[Comparison of diflunisal and tilidine in tumor pain]. / Vergleich von Diflunisal und Tilidin bei Tumorschmerzen.

In an open study in patients with tumour-induced pain the analgetic effects of the prostaglandin-inhibiting compound diflunisal and the centrally-acting analgetic tilidine N were compared. A dosage of 1 g diflunisal was found to be equivalent to 50 drops of tilidine N and to be subjectively well-tolerated. In the pain-relieving therapy of tumour patients diflunisal appears to offer a genuine alternative to centrally-acting analgetics.