Search

Context: Equianalgesic tools are commonly utilized to guide dose of analgesic therapy, but there is no national consensus on equianalgesic calculations in the United States. Objectives: To propose a summary of current opioid equianalgesic data that include variations and trends among national institutions. Methods: Opioid equianalgesic tools were obtained between May and September 2021. For meperidine, tramadol, codeine, hydrocodone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydromorphone, levorphanol, fentanyl, and tapentadol, details of adjustment for incomplete tolerance, opioid equianalgesic ratios, and formulation types were collected and analyzed. Baseline opioid pharmaco kinetic data were obtained through manufacturer labels on FDA databases, including half-life (T1/2), volume of distribution (Vd), clearance (Cl), area under the curve (AUC), max concentration (Cmax), and time to max concentration (Tmax). Results: Thirty-two institutions equianalgesic tools were included with each study opioid appearing on an average of 23 institutions tools. Few tools contained guidance on levorphanol or tapentadol; or included minimum and maximum recommended doses. All tools included guidance on fentanyl, hydromorphone, oxycodone, morphine, and hydrocodone. A minority of tools included guidance on cross-tolerance considerations (n = 12, 37.5%). Oral-tramadol-to-oral-morphine and oral-hydromorphone-to-intravenous (IV)-hydromorphone had the largest variances across equianalgesic tools (6.7 ± 2.8 and 4.06 ± 1.2 mg, respectively). Conclusion: Opioid equianalgesia tools from across the United States demonstrated significant variation in their inclusion of guidance on adjustment for incomplete cross-tolerance, oral-to-IV, and oral-to-oral opioid equianalgesic ratios, and which opioids and formulations were listed. Tramadol and hydromorphone had the most variation in their equianalgesic guidance among the opioids.

Levorphanol is a potent opioid agonist and NMDA receptor blocker with minimal drug interactions, and there are few reports of its use in cancer patients. We aimed to determine the frequency of successful opioid rotation (OR) to levorphanol and the median opioid rotation ratio (ORR) from Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (MEDD). This is a prospective, single-group, interventional study. Cancer outpatients requiring an OR and receiving a MEDD of 60–300 mg were rotated to levorphanol using a ratio of 10:1 and assessed daily for 10-day. Successful OR was defined as a 2-point improvement in the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) pain score on day 10 or achieving the personalized pain goal between days 3–10 in patients with uncontrolled pain or resolution of opioid side effects (OSE) in those undergoing OR for OSE alone. The ORR to levorphanol was calculated using net-MEDD (MEDD before OR minus the MEDD of the breakthrough opioid used along with levorphanol after OR). Forty patients underwent OR to levorphanol, and uncontrolled pain 35/40 (87.5%) was the most common indication. The median net-MEDD and levorphanol doses were 95 and 10 mg, respectively, and 33/40 (82.5%) had a successful OR with a median (IQR) ORR of 8.56 (7.5–10). Successful OR was associated with significant improvement in ESAS and OSE scale scores. There was a strong association between MEDD and levorphanol dose. This study provided preliminary data that cancer patients could be successfully rotated to levorphanol using an ORR of 8.5. Levorphanol was associated with improved pain and symptom control and was well- tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the challenges and variability in calculating opioid dose equivalence, specifically focusing on oral morphine equivalents (OME) and morphine equivalent daily doses (MEDD). The authors highlight that despite existing guidance, there is a lack of standardization in equianalgesic calculations for opioids, leading to inconsistency in clinical practice.

Background: The opioid rotation ratios (ORRs) and conversion ratios (CRs) used worldwide among palliative care (PC) professionals to perform opioid rotations (ORs) and route conversions may have a wide variation. Methods: We surveyed PC professionals on opioid ratios used through email to the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer's PC study group and Twitter and Facebook posts between September and November 2020. Results: We received 370 responses from respondents from 53 countries: 276 (76%) were physicians, 46 (13%) advanced practice providers, 39 (11%) pharmacists, and 9 respondents did not report their profession. There were statistically significant variations in median CR from intravenous (IV) to oral morphine (2–3), IV to oral hydromorphone (2–4.5), ORR from IV hydromorphone to oral morphine (10–20), and ORR from transdermal fentanyl mcg/hour to oral morphine (2–3.5) across various groups. Conclusion: This survey highlights the wide variation in ORRs and CRs among PC clinicians worldwide and the need for further research to standardize practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Cancer-related pain is a complicated symptom that often coincides with fatigue, depression, and anxiety. Although many safe treatments are available, inadequate control of Cancer-related pain continues to lead to suffering in cancer patients. This study’s aim is to describe pain control, and the pattern of change in opioid and adjuvant medication prescriptions, before and after referral to the Palliative Care Center. Methods We conducted a prospective cohort study in adult cancer patients the Palliative Care Center between January 1, 2016 and December 30, 2017. We measured pain intensity and other associated symptoms via the Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and documented detailed analgesics and adjuvant medication history before starting any palliative care and on days 0, 3, 6, and 14. Results The analysis included 240 patients whose cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores meaningfully improved by day 6. The changes in the median (interquartile ranges) of Cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores from day 0 to day 6 were: 6 (4–8) to 3 (1–4); 6 (4–9) to 2 (1–4); and 3 (2–6) to 2 (1–4), respectively, with p

Persons with HIV (PWH) are a population at risk for adverse sequelae of opioid use. Yet, few studies have examined correlates of chronic high risk opioid use and its impact on HIV outcomes. Trends in prescribing patterns and identification of factors that impact the use of opioid prescriptions among PWH are crucial to determine prevention and treatment interventions. This study examined electronic medical records (EMR) of patients receiving HIV care to characterize prescribing patterns and identify risk factors for chronic high risk prescription opioid use and the impact on HIV outcomes among PWH in primary care from July 1, 2016–December 31, 2017. EMR were analyzed from 8,882 patients who were predominantly male and ethnically and racially diverse with half being 50 years of age or older. The majority of the 8,744 prescriptions (98% oral and 2% transdermal preparations) given to 1,040 (12%) patients were oxycodone (71%), 8% were morphine, 7% tramadol, 4% hydrocodone, 4% codeine, 2% fentanyl, and 4% were other opioids. The number of monthly prescriptions decreased about 14% during the study period. Bivariate analyses indicated that most demographic and clinical variables were associated with receipt of any opioid prescription. After controlling for patient socio-demographic characteristics and clinical factors, the odds of receipt of any prescription were higher among patients with pain diagnoses and opioid use and mental health disorders. In addition, the odds of receipt of high average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED) prescriptions were higher for patients with pain diagnoses. Lastly, patients with substance use disorders (SUD) had an increased likelihood of detectable viral load compared to patients with no SUD, after adjusting for known covariates. Our findings show that despite opioid prescribing guidelines and monitoring systems, additional efforts are needed to prevent chronic high risk prescriptions in patients with comorbid conditions, including pain-related, mental health and substance use disorders. Evidence about the risk for chronic high risk use based on prescribing patterns could better inform pain management and opioid prescribing practices for patients receiving HIV care.

Background: Cancer-related pain is a complicated symptom that often coincides with fatigue, depression, and anxiety. Although many safe treatments are available, inadequate control of Cancer-related pain continues to lead to suffering in cancer patients. This study's aim is to describe pain control, and the pattern of change in opioid and adjuvant medication prescriptions, before and after referral to the Palliative Care Center. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study in adult cancer patients the Palliative Care Center between January 1, 2016 and December 30, 2017. We measured pain intensity and other associated symptoms via the Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and documented detailed analgesics and adjuvant medication history before starting any palliative care and on days 0, 3, 6, and 14. Results: The analysis included 240 patients whose cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores meaningfully improved by day 6. The changes in the median (interquartile ranges) of Cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores from day 0 to day 6 were: 6 (4–8) to 3 (1–4); 6 (4–9) to 2 (1–4); and 3 (2–6) to 2 (1–4), respectively, with p < 0.001 for all. Morphine was the most common opioid administered; the percentage using it increased from 20.4% (n = 49) before referral to 49.6% (n = 119) on day 6 (p < 0.001). The median morphine equivalent daily dose decreased from a median (interquartile ranges) of 60(31–93) mg/day before referral to 34(22–66) mg/day on day 6 (p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant increase in the percentage of patients taking adjuvant medications, from 38.8% before referral to 84.2% on day 6 (p < 0.001). Comparing D0 to D6, the number of patients using Gabapentinoids significantly increased from 57(23.75%) to 79(32.9%) (p < 0.001), amitriptyline dramatically increased from 14 (5.8%) to 44 (18.3%) (p < 0.001), and other antidepressant drugs increased from 15 (6.2%) to 34 (14.1%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: After referral to the Palliative Care Center, patients' pain and other symptoms scores decreased significantly, even with lower median morphine equivalent daily doses, arguably through more appropriately directed opioid use. This is evidence for the effectiveness of the comprehensive program at the Palliative Care Center in Kuwait. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: The lack of knowledge of the accurate conversion ratio (CR) between intravenous (IV) and oral hydromorphone and opioid rotation ratio (ORR) between IV hydromorphone and oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) may lead to poorly controlled pain or overdosing in cancer inpatients.Objectives: We aimed to determine the CR and ORR from IV hydromorphone to oral hydromorphone and MEDD (obtained from oral morphine and oxycodone).Methods: A total of 4745 consecutive inpatient palliative care consults during 2010-14 were reviewed for conversions from IV hydromorphone to oral hydromorphone, morphine or oxycodone. Patient characteristics, symptoms, and opioid doses were determined in patients successfully discharged on oral opioids without readmission within one week. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the CR or ORR between the 24 hour IV hydromorphone mg dose before conversion and the oral opioid mg dose used before discharge.Results: Among 394 patients on IV hydromorphone, 147 underwent conversion to oral hydromorphone and 247 underwent rotation to oral morphine (163) or oxycodone (84). The median (interquartile range) CR from IV to PO hydromorphone was 2.5 (2.14-2.75) with correlation of 0.95 (P < 0.0001). The median ORR (interquartile range) from IV hydromorphone to MEDD was 11.46 (9.84-13.00) with correlation of 0.93(P < 0.0001). The median ORR was 11.54 in patients receiving <30 mg of IV hydromorphone/day and 9.86 in patients receiving ≥30 mg (P = 0.0004).Conclusion: Our study found that 1 mg of IV hydromorphone is equivalent to 2.5 mg of oral hydromorphone and 11.46 mg of MEDD. Hydromorphone at doses ≥30 mg/day may require a lower ORR to other opioids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: One-third of cancer patients require opioid rotation (OR) to treat uncontrolled pain or opioid-induced neurotoxicity. Although fentanyl is the most frequently rotated opioid in cancer patients, the accurate opioid rotation ratio (ORR) from transdermal fentanyl (TDF) to other so-called "strong" opioids is unknown.Objectives: We aimed to determine the ORR of TDF to strong opioids, as measured by morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD).Methods: We reviewed 2471 consecutive patient visits (938 patients) to our supportive care center for an OR from TDF to strong opioids. Information regarding demographics, symptoms, and MEDD was collected in patients who followed up within six weeks. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the ORR between TDF dose and net MEDD (MEDD after OR minus MEDD of the breakthrough opioid used along with TDF before OR).Results: Among 47 eligible patients, the median age was 54 years, 53% were male, and 77% had advanced cancer. The median time to follow-up was 14 days. Uncontrolled pain (83%) was the most common reason for OR. In patients with OR and no worsening of pain at follow-up (n = 41), the median ORR (range) from TDF mg/day to net MEDD mg/day was 100 (12.5-217) and from TDF mcg/hour to net MEDD was 2.4 (0.3-5.2); the correlation of TDF dose to net MEDD was 0.60 (P < 0.0001).Conclusion: The median ORR from TDF mg/day to MEDD is 100 and from TDF mcg/hour to MEDD is 2.4, suggesting that TDF 100 mcg/hour is equivalent to an MEDD of 240 mg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Transdermal fentanyl (TDF) is 1 of the most common opioids prescribed to patients with cancer. However, the accurate opioid rotation ratio (ORR) from other opioids to TDF is unknown, and various currently used methods result in wide variation of the ORR. The objective of this study was to determine the ORR of the oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) to the TDF dose when correcting for the MEDD of breakthrough opioids (the net MEDD) in cancer outpatients.Methods: The records of 6790 consecutive patients were reviewed at the authors' supportive care center from 2010 to 2013 to identify those who underwent rotation from other opioids to TDF. Data regarding Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scores and MEDDs were collected for patients who returned for a follow-up visit within 5 weeks. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the ORR between the TDF dose and the net MEDD (the MEDD before opioid rotation [OR] minus the MEDD of the breakthrough opioid used along with TDF after OR).Results: In total, 129 patients underwent OR from other opioids to TDF. The mean patient age was 56 years, 59% were men, and 88% had advanced cancer. Uncontrolled pain (80%) was the most frequent reason for OR. In 101 patients who underwent OR and had no worsening of pain at follow-up, the median ORR from net MEDD to TDF (in mg per day) was 0.01 (range, -0.02 to 0.04), and the correlation coefficient of the TDF dose to the net MEDD was 0.77 (P < .0001). The ORR was not significantly impacted by body mass index or serum albumin. The ORR of 0.01 suggests that an MEDD of 100 mg is equivalent to 1 mg TDF daily or approximately 40 micrograms per hour of TDF (1000 micrograms/24 hours).Conclusions: The median ORR from MEDD to TDF in mg per day was 0.01. These results warrant further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background/Purpose: Anticipated postoperative pain may affect procedure choice in patients with pectus excavatum. This study aims to compare postoperative pain in patients undergoing Nuss and Ravitch procedures. Methods: A 5year retrospective review was performed. Data on age, gender, Haller index, procedure, pain scores, pain medications, and length of hospital stay were collected. Total inpatient opioid administration was converted to morphine equivalent daily dose per kilogram (MEDD/kg) and compared between procedures. Results: One hundred eighty-one patients underwent 125 (69%) Nuss and 56 (31%) Ravitch procedures. Ravitch patients were older (15.7 yo vs 14.6 yo, p=0.004) and had a higher Haller index (5.21 vs 4.10, p=<0.001). Nuss patients had higher average daily pain scores, received 25% more opioids (MEDD/kg 0.66 vs. 0.49, p=<0.001), and received twice as much IV diazepam/kg. In the multivariate analysis, higher MEDD/kg correlated with both the Nuss procedure and older age in the Nuss group. Opioid administration did not correlate with Haller index or Nuss bar fixation technique. Increased NSAID administration did not correlate with lower use of opioids. Conclusion: The Nuss procedure is associated with greater postoperative pain compared to the Ravitch procedure. Opioid use is higher in older patients undergoing the Nuss procedure, but is not associated with severity of deformity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Value in healthcare is reflected by patient-centered outcomes of care per health dollar expended. Although liposomal bupivacaine is more expensive, it has been shown to provide prolonged analgesia (up to 72 hours).Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether the addition of liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine could decrease opioid intake and improve pain control after laparotomy for gynecologic surgery compared with standard bupivacaine alone in an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway.Study Design: A prospective randomized controlled single-blinded trial of wound infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine plus 0.25% bupivacaine (study arm) vs 0.25% bupivacaine (control arm) was performed at a National Cancer Institute-designated tertiary referral cancer center. Participants were patients aged ≥18 years undergoing exploratory laparotomy for a gynecologic indication. All patients were treated on an enhanced recovery pathway including local wound infiltration before closure. In this study, 266 mg of liposomal bupivacaine (free base; equal to 300 mg bupivacaine HCL)+150 mg of bupivacaine mixed in the same syringe was used in the study arm, and 150 mg of bupivacaine was used in the control arm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who were opioid-free within 48 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included number of opioid-free days from postoperative day 0 to postoperative day 3, days to first opioid administration, morphine equivalent daily dose, and patient-reported outcomes collected with the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory was administered as a preoperative baseline, daily while hospitalized, and at least weekly for 8 weeks after discharge. All outcomes were prespecified before data collection.Results: In this study, 102 patients were evaluated. Among them, 16.7% of patients in the study arm received no opioids up to 48 hours compared with 14.8% in the control arm (P=.99). There were no significant differences in the amount of intraoperative opioids administered or days to first opioid use. There was no significant difference between the 2 arms in median cumulative morphine equivalent daily dose (21.3 [study arm] vs 33.8 [control arm]; P=.36) or between the groups in morphine equivalent daily dose per individual day. There were no significant differences in patient-reported pain or interference with walking between the 2 arms or other patient-reported outcomes.Conclusion: Within an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway, adding liposomal bupivacaine to 0.25% bupivacaine wound infiltration did not decrease the proportion of patients who were opioid-free within 48 hours after surgery, did not decrease opioid intake, or did not improve patient's self-reported pain and functional recovery compared with standard bupivacaine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Persons with HIV (PWH) are a population at risk for adverse sequelae of opioid use. Yet, few studies have examined correlates of chronic high risk opioid use and its impact on HIV outcomes. Trends in prescribing patterns and identification of factors that impact the use of opioid prescriptions among PWH are crucial to determine prevention and treatment interventions. This study examined electronic medical records (EMR) of patients receiving HIV care to characterize prescribing patterns and identify risk factors for chronic high risk prescription opioid use and the impact on HIV outcomes among PWH in primary care from July 1, 2016-December 31, 2017. EMR were analyzed from 8,882 patients who were predominantly male and ethnically and racially diverse with half being 50 years of age or older. The majority of the 8,744 prescriptions (98% oral and 2% transdermal preparations) given to 1,040 (12%) patients were oxycodone (71%), 8% were morphine, 7% tramadol, 4% hydrocodone, 4% codeine, 2% fentanyl, and 4% were other opioids. The number of monthly prescriptions decreased about 14% during the study period. Bivariate analyses indicated that most demographic and clinical variables were associated with receipt of any opioid prescription. After controlling for patient socio-demographic characteristics and clinical factors, the odds of receipt of any prescription were higher among patients with pain diagnoses and opioid use and mental health disorders. In addition, the odds of receipt of high average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED) prescriptions were higher for patients with pain diagnoses. Lastly, patients with substance use disorders (SUD) had an increased likelihood of detectable viral load compared to patients with no SUD, after adjusting for known covariates. Our findings show that despite opioid prescribing guidelines and monitoring systems, additional efforts are needed to prevent chronic high risk prescriptions in patients with comorbid conditions, including pain-related, mental health and substance use disorders. Evidence about the risk for chronic high risk use based on prescribing patterns could better inform pain management and opioid prescribing practices for patients receiving HIV care., Competing Interests: JA reports grants from Atea, grants from Emergent Biosolutions, grants from Frontier Technologies, grants from Gilead, grants and personal fees from Glaxo Smith Kline, grants from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Merck, grants from Pfizer, grants from Regeneron, grants from Viiv outside of the submitted work. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Ventuneac, Hecht, Forcht, Duah, Tarar, Langenbach, Gates, Cain, Rendina, Aberg and Perlman.)