Search

Howard S Smith,1,† John F Peppin2,3 1Department of Anesthesiology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA; 2Global Scientific Affairs, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, St Louis, MO, USA; 3Center for Bioethics, Pain Management and Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA†Author deceased May 18, 2013 Abstract: Patients requiring chronic opioid therapy may not respond to or tolerate the first opioid prescribed to them, necessitating rotation to another opioid. They may also require dose increases for a number of reasons, including worsening disease and increased pain. Dose escalation to restore analgesia using the primary opioid may lead to increased adverse events. In these patients, rotation to a different opioid at a lower-than-equivalent dose may be sufficient to maintain adequate tolerability and analgesia. In published trials and case series, opioid rotation is performed either using a predetermined substitute opioid with fixed conversion methods, or in a manner that appears to be no more systematic than trial and error. In clinical practice, opioid rotation must be performed with consideration of individual patient characteristics, comorbidities (eg, concurrent psychiatric, pulmonary, renal, or hepatic illness), and concurrent medications, using flexible dosing protocols that take into account incomplete opioid cross-tolerance. References cited in this review were identified via a search of PubMed covering all English language publications up to May 21, 2013 pertaining to opioid rotation, excluding narrative reviews, letters, and expert opinion. The search yielded a total of 129 articles, 92 of which were judged to provide relevant information and subsequently included in this review. Through a review of this literature and from the authors' empiric experience, this review provides practical information on performing opioid rotation in clinical practice. Keywords: chronic pain, opioid rotation, opioid analgesics

Lynn R Webster1, John F Peppin2, Frederick T Murphy3,4, Jeffrey K Tobias5, Geertrui F Vanhove51Lifetree Clinical Research and Pain Clinic, Lifetree Medical Inc, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 2Clinical Research Division, The Pain Treatment Center of the Bluegrass, Lexington, KY, USA; 3Altoona Center for Clinical Research, Duncansville, PA, USA; 4University of Pennsylvania, School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 5NeurogesX Inc, San Mateo, CA, USABackground: The objective of this study was to assess the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of NGX-4010, a capsaicin 8% patch, following pretreatment with three different topical anesthetics in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain.Methods: This open-label, multicenter study enrolled 117 patients with post-herpetic neuralgia, HIV-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy, or painful diabetic neuropathy. Patients received pretreatment with one of three lidocaine 4%-based topical anesthetics (L.M.X.4® [Ferndale Laboratories Inc, Ferndale, MI], Topicaine® Gel [Estela Basso, Jupiter, FL], or Betacaine Enhanced Gel 4 [Tiberius Inc, Tampa, FL]) for 60 minutes followed by a single 60- or 90-minute NGX-4010 application, and were followed for 12 weeks. Tolerability and safety measures included “pain now” Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) scores, dermal assessments, medication use for treatment-related pain, adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory parameters, physical examinations, and vital signs. The primary efficacy variable was the percentage change in mean NPRS scores for “average pain for the past 24 hours” from baseline to weeks 2 through 12.Results: Treatment with NGX-4010 following pretreatment with any of the three topical anesthetics was generally safe and well tolerated. Nearly all patients completed ≥90% of the planned NGX-4010 application duration. The most common treatment-related AEs, application-site burning and application-site pain, were tr

John F Peppin1, Kristine Majors2, Lynn R Webster3, David M Simpson4, Jeffrey K Tobias5, Geertrui F Vanhove51The Pain Treatment Center of the Bluegrass, Lexington, KY, USA; 2Integrated Clinical Trial Services, Inc, West Des Moines, IA, USA; 3Lifetree Clinical Research and Pain Clinic, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 4Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 5NeurogesX, Inc, San Mateo, CA, USABackground/purpose: NGX-4010 (QUTENZA™; NeurogesX Inc, San Mateo, CA), a capsaicin 8% dermal patch, is licensed in the European Union for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) in nondiabetic adults and in the United States for the treatment of neuropathic pain associated with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). While NGX-4010 treatment is associated with a low risk of systemic adverse events, patch application-related pain is common and may be managed with local cooling and/or oral analgesics. This article characterizes the tolerability of NGX-4010 and will help to guide any pain management.Methods: This integrated analysis of tolerability data collected from the NGX-4010 clinical study program included 1696 patients with PNP. Patch application-related pain on the treatment day was captured as Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) “pain now” scores while “average pain for the past 24 hours” NPRS scores were analyzed for 7 days following treatment. Other tolerability assessments included the percentage of patients completing ≥90% of the intended treatment duration and patients using medication for patch application-related pain.Results: The mean maximum change in “pain now” NPRS scores from pretreatment levels during and after patch application was 2.6 for all patients. This pain was transient and resolved following patch removal. Mean “average pain for the past 24 hours” NPRS scores returned to baseline by the evening of the treatment day for patients with PHN, and the evening of day