We have located links that may give you full text access.
A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 2 dose ratios for conversion from parenteral to oral methadone in patients with cancer pain.
Journal of Clinical Oncology 2016 October 10
206 Background: Methadone (M) is frequently used for severe cancer pain using the parenteral and oral route. The most commonly used dose ratio (DR) parenteral: oral is 1:2. However, methadone is highly bioavailable and a lower ratio might result in similar analgesia with less toxicity. The main objective of this RCT is to compare success and side effects with 2 ratios of parenteral to oral M: 1:2 vs 1:1.2 in hospitalized patients with cancer pain.
METHODS: Inpatients with cancer pain well controlled with parenteral M requiring rotation to the oral route. Double blind RCT. Outcomes included pain intensity (BPI), opioid toxicity (CTCAE), and M dose. Success was defined as good pain control with no toxicity at 72hs.
RESULTS: 39/44 randomized patients were evaluable (89%): 21 in DR 1:2 and 18 in DR 1:1.2. 71% male, median age 65. No significant difference between DR1:2 and DR1:1.2 in frequency of neuropathic pain (64 Vs 68%), Papscore A/B (100 Vs 91%), CAGE + (23 Vs 18%). Median M dose pre/post was 24.5mg±13.5 y 49 mg±27.3 for DR 1:2, Vs 23.3mg±9.4 (p: NS) y 28mg±11.3 (p < 0.01) for DR 1:1.2. The DR1:2 group developed more cumulative toxicity at dasy 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.015, p < 0.006 y p < 0.001 respectively). Pain intensity pre/ post was: 1.58±1.3 and 0.87±1.0, ns for DR 1:2, Vs 1.13±0.7 (p:NS) and 1.07±0.9 (p:NS) for DR 1:1.2. Success was observed in 12 pts in DR1:2 Vs 18 in DR 1:1.2, p < 0.001. Side effects related to M were observed in 33/46 pts in DR 1:2 (mainly neurotoxicity symptoms) Vs 1/6 in DR 1:1.2.
CONCLUSIONS: DR 1:1.2 when changing from parenteral to oral M resulted in lower toxicity and no difference in analgesia. More conservative dose adjustment during M route change should be considered. Granted by Spanish Ministry of Health EC10-133. EUDRACT Number: 2010-024092-39.
CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: 2010-024092-39.
METHODS: Inpatients with cancer pain well controlled with parenteral M requiring rotation to the oral route. Double blind RCT. Outcomes included pain intensity (BPI), opioid toxicity (CTCAE), and M dose. Success was defined as good pain control with no toxicity at 72hs.
RESULTS: 39/44 randomized patients were evaluable (89%): 21 in DR 1:2 and 18 in DR 1:1.2. 71% male, median age 65. No significant difference between DR1:2 and DR1:1.2 in frequency of neuropathic pain (64 Vs 68%), Papscore A/B (100 Vs 91%), CAGE + (23 Vs 18%). Median M dose pre/post was 24.5mg±13.5 y 49 mg±27.3 for DR 1:2, Vs 23.3mg±9.4 (p: NS) y 28mg±11.3 (p < 0.01) for DR 1:1.2. The DR1:2 group developed more cumulative toxicity at dasy 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.015, p < 0.006 y p < 0.001 respectively). Pain intensity pre/ post was: 1.58±1.3 and 0.87±1.0, ns for DR 1:2, Vs 1.13±0.7 (p:NS) and 1.07±0.9 (p:NS) for DR 1:1.2. Success was observed in 12 pts in DR1:2 Vs 18 in DR 1:1.2, p < 0.001. Side effects related to M were observed in 33/46 pts in DR 1:2 (mainly neurotoxicity symptoms) Vs 1/6 in DR 1:1.2.
CONCLUSIONS: DR 1:1.2 when changing from parenteral to oral M resulted in lower toxicity and no difference in analgesia. More conservative dose adjustment during M route change should be considered. Granted by Spanish Ministry of Health EC10-133. EUDRACT Number: 2010-024092-39.
CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: 2010-024092-39.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app