-
Pain Physician Mar 2008Mu agonists have been an important component of pain treatment for thousands of years. The usual pharmacokinetic parameters (half-life, clearance, volume of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mu agonists have been an important component of pain treatment for thousands of years. The usual pharmacokinetic parameters (half-life, clearance, volume of distribution) of opioids have been known for some time. However, the metabolism has, until recently, been poorly understood, and there has been recent interest in the role of metabolites in modifying the pharmacodynamic response in patients, in both analgesia and adverse effects. A number of opioids are available for clinical use, including morphine, hydromorphone, levorphanol, oxycodone, and fentanyl. Advantages and disadvantages of various opioids in the management of chronic pain are discussed.
OBJECTIVE
This review looks at the structure, chemistry, and metabolism of opioids in an effort to better understand the side effects, drug interactions, and the individual responses of patients receiving opioids for the treatment of intractable pain.
CONCLUSION
Mu receptor agonists and agonist-antagonists have been used throughout recent medical history for the control of pain and for the treatment of opiate induced side effects and even opiate withdrawal syndromes.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Drug Interactions; Humans; Models, Molecular; Narcotic Antagonists; Receptors, Opioid, delta; Receptors, Opioid, kappa; Receptors, Opioid, mu
PubMed: 18443637
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Mar 2020Methadone has unique characteristics that make it an attractive agent for the treatment of chronic pain and opioid drug dependence. However, methadone prescription... (Review)
Review
Methadone has unique characteristics that make it an attractive agent for the treatment of chronic pain and opioid drug dependence. However, methadone prescription requires more clinical experience and close monitoring of patients to avoid its undesirable side effects. Recently, levorphanol has emerged as "a forgotten opioid" with a similar profile as methadone. Levorphanol has no impact on QTc prolongation and considerably less drug-drug interactions as compared to methadone. Lack of commercial availability, providers' unfamiliarity, and limited clinical data on its effectiveness remain practical issues. The objective of this article is to review and compare the safety considerations for methadone and levorphanol use.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Central Nervous System; Chronic Pain; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Levorphanol; Methadone; Opioid-Related Disorders; Therapeutic Equivalency
PubMed: 32156130
DOI: 10.21037/apm.2020.02.01 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2017Chronic pain is common and can be challenging to manage. Despite increased utilisation of opioids, the safety and efficacy of long-term use of these compounds for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic pain is common and can be challenging to manage. Despite increased utilisation of opioids, the safety and efficacy of long-term use of these compounds for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) remains controversial. This overview of Cochrane Reviews complements the overview entitled 'High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews'.
OBJECTIVES
To provide an overview of the occurrence and nature of adverse events associated with any opioid agent (any dose, frequency, or route of administration) used on a medium- or long-term basis for the treatment of CNCP in adults.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (the Cochrane Library) Issue 3, 2017 on 8 March 2017 to identify all Cochrane Reviews of studies of medium- or long-term opioid use (2 weeks or more) for CNCP in adults aged 18 and over. We assessed the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR criteria (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) as adapted for Cochrane Overviews. We assessed the quality of the evidence for the outcomes using the GRADE framework.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 16 reviews in our overview, of which 14 presented unique quantitative data. These 14 Cochrane Reviews investigated 14 different opioid agents that were administered for time periods of two weeks or longer. The longest study was 13 months in duration, with most in the 6- to 16-week range. The quality of the included reviews was high using AMSTAR criteria, with 11 reviews meeting all 10 criteria, and 5 of the reviews meeting 9 out of 10, not scoring a point for either duplicate study selection and data extraction, or searching for articles irrespective of language and publication type. The quality of the evidence for the generic adverse event outcomes according to GRADE ranged from very low to moderate, with risk of bias and imprecision being identified for the following generic adverse event outcomes: any adverse event, any serious adverse event, and withdrawals due to adverse events. A GRADE assessment of the quality of the evidence for specific adverse events led to a downgrading to very low- to moderate-quality evidence due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.We calculated the equivalent milligrams of morphine per 24 hours for each opioid studied (buprenorphine, codeine, dextropropoxyphene, dihydrocodeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, levorphanol, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, tapentadol, tilidine, and tramadol). In the 14 Cochrane Reviews providing unique quantitative data, there were 61 studies with a total of 18,679 randomised participants; 12 of these studies had a cross-over design with two to four arms and a total of 796 participants. Based on the 14 selected Cochrane Reviews, there was a significantly increased risk of experiencing any adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 1.66) as well as with opioids compared to a non-opioid active pharmacological comparator, with a similar risk ratio (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.33). There was also a significantly increased risk of experiencing a serious adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (RR 2.75, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.67). Furthermore, we found significantly increased risk ratios with opioids compared to placebo for a number of specific adverse events: constipation, dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, hot flushes, increased sweating, nausea, pruritus, and vomiting.There was no data on any of the following prespecified adverse events of interest in any of the included reviews in this overview of Cochrane Reviews: addiction, cognitive dysfunction, depressive symptoms or mood disturbances, hypogonadism or other endocrine dysfunction, respiratory depression, sexual dysfunction, and sleep apnoea or sleep-disordered breathing. We found no data for adverse events analysed by sex or ethnicity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
A number of adverse events, including serious adverse events, are associated with the medium- and long-term use of opioids for CNCP. The absolute event rate for any adverse event with opioids in trials using a placebo as comparison was 78%, with an absolute event rate of 7.5% for any serious adverse event. Based on the adverse events identified, clinically relevant benefit would need to be clearly demonstrated before long-term use could be considered in people with CNCP in clinical practice. A number of adverse events that we would have expected to occur with opioid use were not reported in the included Cochrane Reviews. Going forward, we recommend more rigorous identification and reporting of all adverse events in randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews on opioid therapy. The absence of data for many adverse events represents a serious limitation of the evidence on opioids. We also recommend extending study follow-up, as a latency of onset may exist for some adverse events.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics, Opioid; Chronic Pain; Humans; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Review Literature as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 29084357
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012509.pub2 -
Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology May 2013To determine if recent observations of hypoglycemia in patients receiving high-dose methadone extended to an animal model, we explored the effects of methadone and other...
To determine if recent observations of hypoglycemia in patients receiving high-dose methadone extended to an animal model, we explored the effects of methadone and other mu-opioids on blood glucose levels in mice. Methadone lowered blood glucose in a dose-dependent manner with 20 mg/kg yielding a nadir in average glucose levels to 55 ± 6 mg/dL from a baseline of 172 ± 7 mg/dL, an effect that was antagonized by naloxone and mu selective antagonists β-funaltrexamine and naloxonazine. The effect was stereoselective and limited to only the l-isomer, while the d-isomer was ineffective. Despite the robust decrease in blood glucose produced by methadone, a series of other mu-opioids, including morphine, fentanyl, levorphanol, oxycodone or morphine-6β-glucuronide failed to lower blood glucose levels. Similar differences among mu-opioid agonists have been observed in other systems, suggesting the possible role of selected splice variants of the mu-opioid receptor gene Oprm1. This mouse model recapitulates our clinical observations and emphasizes the need to carefully monitor glucose levels when using high methadone doses, particularly intravenously, and the need for controlled clinical trials.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Animals; Blood Glucose; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Exons; Hypoglycemia; Male; Methadone; Mice; Mice, Knockout; Receptors, Opioid, mu; Time Factors
PubMed: 23467779
DOI: 10.1007/s10571-013-9919-6 -
Journal of Pain Research 2020Levorphanol is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved long-acting opioid. Most information on perioperative use of levorphanol comes from the early- and mid-1950s... (Review)
Review
Levorphanol is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved long-acting opioid. Most information on perioperative use of levorphanol comes from the early- and mid-1950s when this drug emerged in the field of experimental pharmacology and anesthesia. It was mainly studied during this period with some additional data being generated in the 1960s and 70s. Since this time, perioperative use has declined and research is limited. This review of literature aims to provide pharmacologic and historic description of levorphanol as a tool for perioperative pain management and as an aid to potentially decrease total postoperative opioid use during the current opioid crisis.
PubMed: 33154662
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S271456 -
Pain Physician Mar 2018Levorphanol is a long-acting opioid analgesic that is an optical isomer of dextrorphan, a metabolite of the over-the-counter cough suppressant dextromethorphan....
BACKGROUND
Levorphanol is a long-acting opioid analgesic that is an optical isomer of dextrorphan, a metabolite of the over-the-counter cough suppressant dextromethorphan. Providers prescribing levorphanol for pain management may need to assess compliance through urine drug testing, as this agent is subject to abuse. Therefore, it is important to differentiate between dextromethorphan and levorphanol ingestion.
OBJECTIVES
This article is the first to report urine concentrations of levorphanol/dextrorphan and 3-hydroxymorphinan in human urine and assesses the need for an enantiomeric analysis to distinguish between dextromethorphan and levorphanol ingestion.
STUDY DESIGN
Retrospective data review.
METHODS
Medication compliance test results were reviewed for 521 urine samples submitted to Aegis Sciences Corporation between July 2014 and July 2016. Samples were included in this analysis if dextromethorphan or levorphanol testing was requested by the ordering provider. Urine samples were hydrolyzed with beta-glucuronidase and analyzed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). An enantiomeric analysis to distinguish levorphanol from dextrorphan and (-)-3-hydroxymorphinan (norlevorphanol) from (+)-3-hydroxymorphinan was not performed.
RESULTS
Nineteen urine samples with levorphanol listed as prescribed had median levorphanol/dextrorphan and 3-hydroxymorphinan concentrations of 1,881 ng/mL and 141 ng/mL, respectively. One-quarter of the urine samples with dextromethorphan listed as prescribed did not have any detectable dextromethorphan or 3-methoxymorphinan.
LIMITATIONS
An enantiomeric analysis was not utilized with the LC-MS/MS testing method; therefore, levorphanol could not be differentiated from dextrorphan, and (-)-3-hydroxymorphinan could not be differentiated from (+)-3-hydroxymorphinan. The hepatic and renal function for these patients was unknown; however, both could impact the metabolism, distribution, and excretion of levorphanol biomarkers in urine. The dextromethorphan and/or levorphanol dose and timing of last ingestion was also not assessed.
CONCLUSIONS
It may be impossible to distinguish between levorphanol and dextromethorphan ingestion based on urine biomarkers, unless dextromethorphan or 3-methoxymorphinan is present or an enantiomeric analysis is performed. Therefore, the potential exists for patients prescribed levorphanol to ingest dextromethorphan and appear compliant with levorphanol therapy. This should prompt clinicians to consider the parameters of their laboratory's testing method when interpreting levorphanol drug test results.
KEY WORDS
Levorphanol, dextrorphan, dextromethorphan, 3-hydroxymorphinan, urine testing, urine concentration, drug testing, medication compliance testing.
Topics: Biomarkers; Chromatography, Liquid; Dextromethorphan; Dextrorphan; Female; Humans; Levorphanol; Male; Retrospective Studies; Substance Abuse Detection
PubMed: 29565959
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015Agitation is a common experience for people living with dementia, particularly as day-to-day function and cognition start to decline more. At the present time there are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Agitation is a common experience for people living with dementia, particularly as day-to-day function and cognition start to decline more. At the present time there are limited pharmacological options for relieving agitation and little is known about the safety and efficacy of opioid drugs in this setting.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical efficacy and safety of opioids for agitation in people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 13 June 2014 using the terms: narcotic OR opioid OR opium OR morphine OR buprenorphine OR codeine OR dextromoramide OR diphenoxylate OR dipipanone OR dextropropoxyphene OR propoxyphene OR diamorphine OR dihydrocodeine OR alfentanil OR fentanyl OR remifentanil OR meptazinol OR methadone OR nalbuphine OR oxycodone OR papaveretum OR pentazocine OR meperidine OR pethidine OR phenazocine OR hydrocodone OR hydromorphone OR levorphanol OR oxymorphone OR butorphanol OR dezocine OR sufentanil OR ketobemidone.ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE and PscyINFO, as well as numerous trial registries and grey literature sources.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, controlled trials of opioids compared to placebo for agitation in people with dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed the studies identified by the search against the inclusion criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
There are currently no completed randomised, placebo controlled trials of opioids for agitation in dementia. There are two potentially relevant trials still in progress.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found insufficient evidence to establish the clinical efficacy and safety of opioids for agitation in people with dementia. There remains a lack of data to determine if or when opioids either relieve or exacerbate agitation. More evidence is needed to guide the effective, appropriate and safe use of opioids in dementia.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Dementia; Humans; Psychomotor Agitation
PubMed: 25972091
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009705.pub2