-
Palliative Medicine Jan 2019End-stage liver disease is a common cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, yet little is known about its symptomatology and impact on health-related quality of life. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND:
End-stage liver disease is a common cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, yet little is known about its symptomatology and impact on health-related quality of life.
AIM:
To describe symptom prevalence and health-related quality of life of patients with end-stage liver disease to improve care.
DESIGN:
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES:
We searched eight electronic databases from January 1980 to June 2018 for studies investigating symptom prevalence or health-related quality of life of adult patients with end-stage liver disease. No language restrictions were applied. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate.
RESULTS:
We included 80 studies: 35 assessing symptom prevalence, 41 assessing health-related quality of life, and 4 both. The instruments assessing symptoms varied across studies. The most frequently reported symptoms were as follows: pain (prevalence range 30%–79%), breathlessness (20%–88%), muscle cramps (56%–68%), sleep disturbance (insomnia 26%–77%, daytime sleepiness 29.5%–71%), and psychological symptoms (depression 4.5%–64%, anxiety 14%–45%). Erectile dysfunction was prevalent (53%–93%) in men. The health-related quality of life of patients with end-stage liver disease was significantly impaired when compared to healthy controls or patients with chronic liver disease. Compared with compensated cirrhosis, decompensation led to significant worsening of both components of the 36-Item Short Form Survey although to a larger degree for the Physical Component Summary score (decrease from average 6.4 (95% confidence interval: 4.0–8.8); p < 0.001) than for the Mental Component Summary score (4.5 (95% confidence interval: 2.4–6.6); p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION:
The symptom prevalence of patients with end-stage liver disease resembled that of patients with other advanced conditions. Given the diversity of symptoms and significantly impaired health-related quality of life, multidisciplinary approach and timely intervention are crucial.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; End Stage Liver Disease; Female; Humans; Liver Cirrhosis; Male; Middle Aged; Palliative Care; Prevalence; Quality of Life; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 30345878
DOI: 10.1177/0269216318807051 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Anxiety in relation to surgery is a well-known problem. Melatonin offers an alternative treatment to benzodiazepines for ameliorating this condition in the preoperative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anxiety in relation to surgery is a well-known problem. Melatonin offers an alternative treatment to benzodiazepines for ameliorating this condition in the preoperative and postoperative periods.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of melatonin on preoperative and postoperative anxiety compared to placebo or benzodiazepines.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 10 July 2020: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science. For ongoing trials and protocols, we searched clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized, placebo-controlled or standard treatment-controlled (or both) studies that evaluated the effects of preoperatively administered melatonin on preoperative or postoperative anxiety. We included adult patients of both sexes (15 to 90 years of age) undergoing any kind of surgical procedure for which it was necessary to use general, regional, or topical anaesthesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
One review author conducted data extraction in duplicate. Data extracted included information about study design, country of origin, number of participants and demographic details, type of surgery, type of anaesthesia, intervention and dosing regimens, preoperative anxiety outcome measures, and postoperative anxiety outcome measures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involving 2319 participants, that assessed melatonin for treating preoperative anxiety, postoperative anxiety, or both. Twenty-four studies compared melatonin with placebo. Eleven studies compared melatonin to a benzodiazepine (seven studies with midazolam, three studies with alprazolam, and one study with oxazepam). Other comparators in a small number of studies were gabapentin, clonidine, and pregabalin. No studies were judged to be at low risk of bias for all domains. Most studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias overall. Eight studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in one or more domain, and thus, to be at high risk of bias overall. Melatonin versus placebo Melatonin probably results in a reduction in preoperative anxiety measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0 to 100 mm) compared to placebo (mean difference (MD) -11.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.80 to -9.59; 18 studies, 1264 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), based on a meta-analysis of 18 studies. Melatonin may reduce immediate postoperative anxiety measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS compared to placebo (MD -5.04, 95% CI -9.52 to -0.55; 7 studies, 524 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may reduce delayed postoperative anxiety measured six hours after surgery using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) (MD -5.31, 95% CI -8.78 to -1.84; 2 studies; 73 participants; low-certainty evidence). Melatonin versus benzodiazepines (midazolam and alprazolam) Melatonin probably results in little or no difference in preoperative anxiety measured on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (MD 0.78, 95% CI -2.02 to 3.58; 7 studies, 409 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and there may be little or no difference in immediate postoperative anxiety (MD -2.12, 95% CI -4.61 to 0.36; 3 studies, 176 participants; low-certainty evidence). Adverse events Fourteen studies did not report on adverse events. Six studies specifically reported that no side effects were observed, and the remaining seven studies reported cases of nausea, sleepiness, dizziness, and headache; however, no serious adverse events were reported. Eleven studies measured psychomotor and cognitive function, or both, and in general, these studies found that benzodiazepines impaired psychomotor and cognitive function more than placebo and melatonin. Fourteen studies evaluated sedation and generally found that benzodiazepine caused the highest degree of sedation, but melatonin also showed sedative properties compared to placebo. Several studies did not report on adverse events; therefore, it is not possible to conclude with certainty, from the data on adverse effects collected in this review, that melatonin is better tolerated than benzodiazepines.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When compared with placebo, melatonin given as premedication (as tablets or sublingually) probably reduces preoperative anxiety in adults (measured 50 to 120 minutes after administration), which is potentially clinically relevant. The effect of melatonin on postoperative anxiety compared to placebo (measured in the recovery room and six hours after surgery) was also evident but was much smaller, and the clinical relevance of this finding is uncertain. There was little or no difference in anxiety when melatonin was compared with benzodiazepines. Thus, melatonin may have a similar effect to benzodiazepines in reducing preoperative and postoperative anxiety in adults.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alprazolam; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Anxiety; Bias; Clonidine; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Melatonin; Midazolam; Middle Aged; Oxazepam; Postoperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Care; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Procedures, Operative
PubMed: 33319916
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009861.pub3 -
Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine :... Feb 2019The purpose of this systematic review is to provide supporting evidence for the clinical practice guideline for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this systematic review is to provide supporting evidence for the clinical practice guideline for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults using positive airway pressure (PAP).
METHODS
The American Academy of Sleep Medicine commissioned a task force of experts in sleep medicine. A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that compared the use of PAP with no treatment as well as studies that compared different PAP modalities. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the clinical significance of using PAP in several modalities (ie, continuous PAP, auto-adjusting PAP, and bilevel PAP), to treat OSA in adults. In addition, meta-analyses were performed to determine the clinical significance of using an in-laboratory versus ambulatory strategy for the initiation of PAP, educational and behavioral interventions, telemonitoring, humidification, different mask interfaces, and flexible or modified pressure profile PAP in conjunction with PAP to treat OSA in adults. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process was used to assess the evidence for making recommendations.
RESULTS
The literature search resulted in 336 studies that met inclusion criteria; 184 studies provided data suitable for meta-analyses. The data demonstrated that PAP compared to no treatment results in a clinically significant reduction in disease severity, sleepiness, blood pressure, and motor vehicle accidents, and improvement in sleep-related quality of life in adults with OSA. In addition, the initiation of PAP in the home demonstrated equivalent effects on patient outcomes when compared to an in-laboratory titration approach. The data also demonstrated that the use of auto-adjusting or bilevel PAP did not result in clinically significant differences in patient outcomes compared with standard continuous PAP. Furthermore, data demonstrated a clinically significant improvement in PAP adherence with the use of educational, behavioral, troubleshooting, and telemonitoring interventions. Systematic reviews for specific PAP delivery method were also performed and suggested that nasal interfaces compared to oronasal interfaces have improved adherence and slightly greater reductions in OSA severity, heated humidification compared to no humidification reduces some continuous PAP-related side effects, and pressure profile PAP did not result in clinically significant differences in patient outcomes compared with standard continuous PAP.
Topics: Adult; Equipment Design; GRADE Approach; Humans; Patient Compliance; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30736888
DOI: 10.5664/jcsm.7638 -
Multiple Sclerosis Journal -... 2023Sleep disturbance is common in people with multiple sclerosis and may worsen fatigue; however, the assessment of sleep-fatigue relationships varies across studies. To... (Review)
Review
Sleep disturbance is common in people with multiple sclerosis and may worsen fatigue; however, the assessment of sleep-fatigue relationships varies across studies. To better understand sleep-fatigue relationships in this population, we conducted a systematic review and random effects meta-analyses for the associations between fatigue and 10 sleep variables: Sleep-disordered breathing, daytime sleepiness, sleep quality, insomnia, restless legs, number of awakenings, sleep efficiency, sleep latency, sleep duration, and wake after sleep onset. Of the 1062 studies screened, 46 met inclusion criteria and provided sufficient data for calculating Hedges' g. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Sample characteristics did not differ between the 10 analyses. Results indicated that sleep quality and insomnia (assessed via self-report or diagnostic criteria) were strongly associated with fatigue (all s ≥ 0.80 and all < .001). In contrast, the number of awakenings and sleep duration (assessed objectively) were not significantly associated with fatigue. Remaining sleep variables yielded moderate, significant effects. Most effects did not vary based on study quality or sample demographics. Results highlight that insomnia and perceptions of poor sleep have a stronger link than objective sleep duration to fatigue in multiple sclerosis and may represent a more effective target for intervention.
PubMed: 37641617
DOI: 10.1177/20552173231194352 -
European Review For Medical and... Jul 2023The aim of the study was to summarize the findings of the studies documenting the efficacy and safety of perampanel when used in children/adolescents or adults, either... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to summarize the findings of the studies documenting the efficacy and safety of perampanel when used in children/adolescents or adults, either as add-on therapy or as monotherapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus. Only studies with a cohort-based approach (either prospective or retrospective) were included. We were interested in real-world studies and therefore, studies with a highly regulated environment, such as randomized controlled trials, were excluded. The primary outcomes of interest were retention rates, response rates and seizure-free rates. Random effects model was used for the analysis. Effect sizes were reported as pooled prevalence along with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 34 studies were included. The retention rates, within 24 months from initiation of treatment as an add-on therapy, ranged between 65% to 77% among children and adolescents. For adults, the retention rate varied between 56 to 77% within 24 months from initiation of treatment. The response rate was around 70% in children/adolescents and 52% in adults at 24 months of follow-up. Around 25% of children and adolescents and 37% of adults were seizure-free at 24 months follow-up period. The proportion of children/adolescents and adults reporting any treatment-related adverse effects was 29% and 41%, respectively. The commonly reported adverse effects were dizziness/drowsiness, somnolence, behavioral problems (irritability, aggression, anxiety, mood changes), postural instability/gait problems, fatigue and weight gain.
CONCLUSIONS
Perampanel might be an effective anti-epileptic drug in both children/adolescents and adults when used as an adjunct therapy. More data is required to comment on its use as monotherapy. Careful monitoring for psychiatric problems and behavioral disturbances is required, both prior to initiating treatment as well as during the course of management. Studies with long-term follow-up may are needed to confirm the findings of this meta-analysis.
Topics: Adult; Child; Adolescent; Humans; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsies, Partial; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Epilepsy; Nitriles; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37458642
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202307_32957 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2017Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The treatment is primarily based on pharmacological agents. Although primidone and propranolol are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The treatment is primarily based on pharmacological agents. Although primidone and propranolol are well established treatments in clinical practice, they can be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients, and can produce serious adverse events in a large percentage of them. For these reasons, it may be worthwhile evaluating the treatment alternatives for ET. Zonisamide has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for the treatment of ET but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect on functional abilities and the safety profile of zonisamide in adults with essential tremor (ET).
SEARCH METHODS
We carried out a systematic search, without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to January 2017. We searched BIOSIS Citation Index (2000 to January 2017) for conference proceedings. We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of zonisamide versus placebo or any other treatment. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in patients presenting secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence.We used inverse variance methods for continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared differences between treatment groups as mean differences. We combined results for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel methods and obtained risk differences to compare treatment groups. We used Review Manager 5 software for data management and analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We only considered one study eligible for this review (20 participants). Assessments of risk of bias for most domains were unclear or low. Adverse events were only reported in participants from the zonisamide group, making it possible that they were aware of treatment group assignment. We are uncertain as to the effects of zonisamide on motor tasks (mean difference (MD) -0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.51 to 1.51, very low-quality evidence) and functional disabilities (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.63, very low-quality evidence) when compared with placebo. Three participants in the zonisamide group (30%) and two participants in the placebo group (20%) discontinued the treatment and withdrew from the study for any reason (very low-quality evidence), however the increased risk of withdrawal in the zonisamide group was statistically non-significant (risk difference (RD) 0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.48). Six participants in the zonisamide group (60%) and none of the participants in the placebo group (0%) developed adverse events (AEs), with a RD of 0.60 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.92; very low quality evidence). The most common AEs, experienced with zonisamide treatment, were headache, nausea, fatigue, sleepiness, and diarrhoea. Quality of life was not assessed in the study included.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on currently available data, there is insufficient evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of zonisamide treatment for ET.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Essential Tremor; Humans; Isoxazoles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zonisamide
PubMed: 28836659
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009684.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Tinnitus is a symptom defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Tinnitus is a symptom defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice consultations every year where the primary complaint is tinnitus, equating to a major burden on healthcare services. Clinical management strategies include education and advice, relaxation therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, sound enrichment using ear-level sound generators or hearing aids, and drug therapies to manage co-morbid symptoms such as sleep difficulties, anxiety or depression. As yet, no drug has been approved for tinnitus by a regulatory body. Nonetheless, over 100,000 prescriptions for betahistine are being filled every month in England, and nearly 10% of general practitioners prescribe betahistine for tinnitus.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of betahistine in patients with subjective idiopathic tinnitus.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 July 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting patients of any age with acute or chronic subjective idiopathic tinnitus were included. We included studies where the intervention involved betahistine and this was compared to placebo, no intervention or education and information. We included all courses of betahistine, regardless of dose regimens or formulations and for any duration of treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes included tinnitus loudness and significant adverse effects (upper gastrointestinal discomfort). Our secondary outcomes included tinnitus symptom severity as measured by the global score on a multi-item tinnitus questionnaire, depressive symptoms, symptoms of generalised anxiety, health-related quality of life, other adverse effects (e.g. headache, drowsiness, allergic skin reactions (pruritis, rashes) and exacerbation of tinnitus) and tinnitus intrusiveness. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included five studies (with a total of 303 to 305 participants) comparing the effects of betahistine with placebo in adults with subjective idiopathic tinnitus. Four studies were parallel-group RCTs and one had a cross-over design. The risk of bias was unclear in all of the included studies.Due to heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and measurement methods used, very limited data pooling was possible. When we pooled the data from two studies for the primary outcome tinnitus loudness, the mean difference on a 0- to 10-point visual analogue scale at one-month follow-up was not significant between betahistine and placebo (-0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.70; 81 participants) (very low-quality evidence). There were no reports of upper gastrointestinal discomfort (significant adverse effect) in any study.As a secondary outcome, one study found no difference in the change in the Tinnitus Severity Index between betahistine and placebo (mean difference at 12 weeks 0.02, 95% CI -1.05 to 1.09; 50 participants) (moderate-quality evidence). None of the studies reported the other secondary outcomes of changes in depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety, or health-related quality of life as measured by a validated instrument, nor tinnitus intrusiveness.Other adverse effects that were reported were not treatment-related.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is an absence of evidence to suggest that betahistine has an effect on subjective idiopathic tinnitus when compared to placebo. The evidence suggests that betahistine is generally well tolerated with a similar risk of adverse effects to placebo treatments. The quality of evidence for the reported outcomes, using GRADE, ranged from moderate to very low.If future research into the effectiveness of betahistine in patients with tinnitus is felt to be warranted, it should use rigorous methodology. Randomisation and blinding should be of the highest quality, given the subjective nature of tinnitus and the strong likelihood of a placebo response. The CONSORT statement should be used in the design and reporting of future studies. We also recommend the development of validated, patient-centred outcome measures for research in the field of tinnitus.
PubMed: 30908589
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013093.pub2 -
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics Feb 2024Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a novel noninvasive ultrasonic brain stimulation that can increase cortical and corticospinal excitability, induce...
BACKGROUND
Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a novel noninvasive ultrasonic brain stimulation that can increase cortical and corticospinal excitability, induce neuroplasticity, and increase functional connectivity within the brain. Several trials have confirmed its potential in treating Alzheimer's disease (AD).
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effect and safety of TPS on AD.
DESIGN
A systematic review.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase via Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), VIP (China Science and Technology Journal Database), and WanFang were searched from inception to April 1, 2023. Study selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation of the studies were conducted by two reviewers independently, with any controversy resolved by consensus. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Five studies were included in this review, with a total of 99 patients with AD. For cognitive performance, TPS significantly improved the scores of the CERAD (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease) test battery, Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (cognitive), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Mini-Mental Status Examination. For depressive symptoms, TPS significantly reduced the scores of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (affective), Geriatric Depression Score, and Beck Depression Inventory. By functional magnetic resonance imaging, studies have shown that TPS improved cognitive performance in AD patients by increasing functional connectivity in the hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, precuneus, and parietal cortex, and activating cortical activity in the bilateral hippocampus. TPS alleviated depressive symptoms in AD patients by decreasing functional connectivity between the ventromedial network (left frontal orbital cortex) and the salience network (right anterior insula). Adverse events in this review, including headache, worsening mood, jaw pain, nausea, and drowsiness, were reversible and lasted no longer than 1 day. No serious adverse events or complications were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
TPS is promising in improving cognitive performance and reducing depressive symptoms in patients with AD. TPS may be a safe adjunct therapy in the treatment of AD. However, these findings lacked a sham control and were limited by the small sample size of the included studies. Further research may be needed to better explore the potential of TPS.
PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Patients and the public were not involved in this study.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Brain; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Hippocampus; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
PubMed: 37469252
DOI: 10.1111/cns.14372 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue affecting approximately 2% of the general population. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Cannabis has been used for millennia to reduce pain and other somatic and psychological symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of cannabinoids for fibromyalgia symptoms in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE to April 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, three clinical trial registries, and contact with trial authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials of at least four weeks' duration of any formulation of cannabis products used for the treatment of adults with fibromyalgia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence was derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for drop-outs; at least 200 participants in the comparison, eight to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design), second tier evidence from data that did not meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers (i.e. data from at least 200 participants) in the comparison, and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that were considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
MAIN RESULTS
We included two studies with 72 participants. Overall, the two studies were at moderate risk of bias. The evidence was derived from group mean data and completer analysis (very low quality evidence overall). We rated the quality of all outcomes according to GRADE as very low due to indirectness, imprecision and potential reporting bias.The primary outcomes in our review were participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) much or very much improved, withdrawal due to adverse events (tolerability) and serious adverse events (safety). Nabilone was compared to placebo and to amitriptyline in one study each. Study sizes were 32 and 40 participants. One study used a cross-over design and one used a parallel group design; study duration was four or six weeks. Both studies used nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, with a bedtime dosage of 1 mg/day. No study reported the proportion of participants experiencing at least 30% or 50% pain relief or who were very much improved. No study provided first or second tier (high to moderate quality) evidence for an outcome of efficacy, tolerability and safety. Third tier (very low quality) evidence indicated greater reduction of pain and limitations of HRQoL compared to placebo in one study. There were no significant differences to placebo noted for fatigue and depression (very low quality evidence). Third tier evidence indicated better effects of nabilone on sleep than amitriptyline (very low quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the two drugs noted for pain, mood and HRQoL (very low quality evidence). More participants dropped out due to adverse events in the nabilone groups (4/52 participants) than in the control groups (1/20 in placebo and 0/32 in amitriptyline group). The most frequent adverse events were dizziness, nausea, dry mouth and drowsiness (six participants with nabilone). Neither study reported serious adverse events during the period of both studies. We planned to create a GRADE 'Summary of findings' table, but due to the scarcity of data we were unable to do this. We found no relevant study with herbal cannabis, plant-based cannabinoids or synthetic cannabinoids other than nabilone in fibromyalgia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no convincing, unbiased, high quality evidence suggesting that nabilone is of value in treating people with fibromyalgia. The tolerability of nabilone was low in people with fibromyalgia.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Amitriptyline; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Cannabinoids; Dronabinol; Fibromyalgia; Health Status; Humans; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27428009
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011694.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Many people with cancer experience moderate to severe pain that requires treatment with strong opioids, such as oxycodone and morphine. Strong opioids are, however, not... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many people with cancer experience moderate to severe pain that requires treatment with strong opioids, such as oxycodone and morphine. Strong opioids are, however, not effective for pain in all people, neither are they well tolerated by all people. The aim of this review was to assess whether oxycodone is associated with better pain relief and tolerability than other analgesic options for adults with cancer pain. This is an updated Cochrane review previously published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of oxycodone by any route of administration for pain in adults with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (ISI Web of Science), BIOSIS (ISI), and PsycINFO (Ovid) to November 2021. We also searched four trial registries, checked the bibliographic references of relevant studies, and contacted the authors of the included studies. We applied no language, date, or publication status restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (parallel-group or cross-over) comparing oxycodone (any formulation or route of administration) with placebo or an active drug (including oxycodone) for cancer background pain in adults by examining pain intensity/relief, adverse events, quality of life, and participant preference.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently sifted the search, extracted data and assessed the included studies using standard Cochrane methodology. We meta-analysed pain intensity data using the generic inverse variance method, and pain relief and adverse events using the Mantel-Haenszel method, or summarised these data narratively along with the quality of life and participant preference data. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we identified 19 new studies (1836 participants) for inclusion. In total, we included 42 studies which enrolled/randomised 4485 participants, with 3945 of these analysed for efficacy and 4176 for safety. The studies examined a number of different drug comparisons. Controlled-release (CR; typically taken every 12 hours) oxycodone versus immediate-release (IR; taken every 4-6 hours) oxycodone Pooled analysis of three of the four studies comparing CR oxycodone to IR oxycodone suggest that there is little to no difference between CR and IR oxycodone in pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.1 to 0.34; n = 319; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on adverse events, including constipation (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13), drowsiness/somnolence (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.54), nausea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.28), and vomiting (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.15) (very low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life or participant preference, however, three studies suggested that treatment acceptability may be similar between groups (low-certainty evidence). CR oxycodone versus CR morphine The majority of the 24 studies comparing CR oxycodone to CR morphine reported either pain intensity (continuous variable), pain relief (dichotomous variable), or both. Pooled analysis indicated that pain intensity may be lower (better) after treatment with CR morphine than CR oxycodone (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.27; n = 882 in 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). This SMD is equivalent to a difference of 0.27 points on the Brief Pain Inventory scale (0-10 numerical rating scale), which is not clinically significant. Pooled analyses also suggested that there may be little to no difference in the proportion of participants achieving complete or significant pain relief (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10; n = 1249 in 13 studies; low-certainty evidence). The RR for constipation (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86) may be lower after treatment with CR oxycodone than after CR morphine. Pooled analyses showed that, for most of the adverse events, the CIs were wide, including no effect as well as potential benefit and harm: drowsiness/somnolence (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05), nausea (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.12), and vomiting (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.04) (low or very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the treatment effects on treatment acceptability and participant preference. Other comparisons The remaining studies either compared oxycodone in various formulations or compared oxycodone to different alternative opioids. None found any clear superiority or inferiority of oxycodone for cancer pain, neither as an analgesic agent nor in terms of adverse event rates and treatment acceptability. The certainty of this evidence base was limited by the high or unclear risk of bias of the studies and by imprecision due to low or very low event rates or participant numbers for many outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions have not changed since the previous version of this review (in 2017). We found low-certainty evidence that there may be little to no difference in pain intensity, pain relief and adverse events between oxycodone and other strong opioids including morphine, commonly considered the gold standard strong opioid. Although we identified a benefit for pain relief in favour of CR morphine over CR oxycodone, this was not clinically significant and did not persist following sensitivity analysis and so we do not consider this important. However, we found that constipation and hallucinations occurred less often with CR oxycodone than with CR morphine; but the certainty of this evidence was either very low or the finding did not persist following sensitivity analysis, so these findings should be treated with utmost caution. Our conclusions are consistent with other reviews and suggest that, while the reliability of the evidence base is low, given the absence of important differences within this analysis, it seems unlikely that larger head-to-head studies of oxycodone versus morphine are justified, although well-designed trials comparing oxycodone to other strong analgesics may well be useful. For clinical purposes, oxycodone or morphine can be used as first-line oral opioids for relief of cancer pain in adults.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Constipation; Humans; Morphine; Nausea; Neoplasms; Oxycodone; Pain; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Sleepiness; Vomiting
PubMed: 35679121
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003870.pub7