Epidural Association of Morphine and Ropivacaine for Cancer Pain Treatment

September 23, 2022 updated by: Larissa Helena Lobo Torres Pacheco, Universidade Federal de Alfenas

Effectiveness of Epidural Morphine and Ropivacaine Treatment for Abdominal Cancer Pain in Patients of Brazilian's Public Health System

In 2012, more than 14 million cases of cancer were diagnosed worldwide, with the forecast for 2025 exceeding 20 million. Pain is the most critical symptom that accompanies cancer. The development of disease generates the need for oncological palliative care and adequacy of the structure by Public Health Care System. In this context, this study aims to evaluate an alternative to the treatment plans provided for in the Brazilian's Public Health Care System table. The objective is to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis of the epidural administration of morphine and ropivacaine in patients with abdominal neoplasia, and pain that is difficult to clinically control, which leads to an improvement in the quality of life, functional conditions and survival of patients, and that reduces the cost to the Brazilian's Public Health Care System. This is a randomized clinical trial. Patients will be divided into two groups: control and intervention. The control group will receive oral treatment according to the Clinical Protocol and Therapeutic Guidelines for Chronic Pain of the Brazilian's Ministry of Health: morphine, pregabalin and duloxetine. The intervention group will receive an anesthetic solution containing morphine and ropivacaine for epidural administration through a surgically implanted catheter. Pain, quality of life, functional capacity and survival will be evaluated using the following instruments: Visual Analogue Scale; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire "Core" 30; Karnofsky Performance Scale; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Scale; Palliative Performance Scale; and Palliative Prognosis Index. It is expected that, at the end of the study, the intervention group will represent a significant savings for the Public Health Care System, due to the decrease in the number of hospitalizations/day and the possible complications due to the lack of effectiveness of the oral treatment. It is expected that the results found will produce scientific support to disseminate the proposed treatment plan for Brazilian's Public Health Care System patients in palliative care.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

30

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

    • Minas Gerais
      • Alfenas, Minas Gerais, Brazil, 37137001
        • Recruiting
        • Larissa Helena Lobo Torres Pacheco
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Carlos Marcelo Barros, M.D.
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Márcia Helena MC Podestá, PhD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Liliana B Vieira, PhD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Carla S Ceron, PhD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Vanessa B Boralli, PhD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Carolina Aparecida F Almeida, MSC
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Rafaela F Rodrigues, PhD

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 75 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients aged between 18 and 75 years,
  • both sexes
  • diagnosed with abdominal neoplasia and with PPI < 2.0, which indicates a survival of at least 90 days
  • have full cognitive conditions
  • Patients must also have a caregiver with cognitive conditions.

Exclusion Criteria:

- Patients with technical incapacity to implant the catheter will be excluded, namely: patient refusal, infection at the puncture site and hemodynamic instability.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Control Group (Oral Morphine)
The control group will be composed of 15 patients who will receive oral drug treatment according to the Clinical Protocol and Therapeutic Guidelines for Chronic Pain of the Brazilian Ministry of Health. The drugs included in the treatment plan are morphine (60 mg/day), pregabalin (150 mg/day) and duloxetine (60 mg/day), available free of charge to the participating patients. The treatment will be carried out orally in a home environment.
Oral administration of morphine, pregabalin or duloxetin
Experimental: Interventional Group (Epidural morphine)
The intervention group will be composed of 15 patients who will undergo a surgical procedure for subcutaneous implantation of a catheter (Celsite ST304-19BBraun) that allows epidural administration of morphine and ropivacaine drugs. The treatment plan for such patients includes Patient Controlled Analgesia (PCA). Patients in this group will receive, via catheter, an anesthetic solution containing 2.0 mL of morphine (1.0 mg/mL), 3.0 mL of ropivacaine (7.5 mg/mL) and 5.0 mL of distilled water. For 24 hours after this application, if the patient continues to have pain, they may use a rescue dose of oral morphine of 10 mg.
Implantation of an epidural catheter for administration of morphine and ropvacaine

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Assessment of effectiveness of epidural morphine/ropivacaine treatment
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change From Baseline in Pain Scores on the Visual Analog Scale (0 means no pain and 10 means worst pain) in patients in the control group and intervention group for up to 60 days.
Up to 60 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Assessment of quality of life
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change of quality of life score by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), which consists of a likert-type scale ranging from 1 to 4 for functions and symptoms, where 1= not at all, 2=slightly, 3= moderately, and 4 = very much. If the resulting score on the functional scale is high, this represents a healthy functional level, while a high score on the symptom scale represents a low level of symptom tolerance and treatment side effects. This scale also assesses overall health, ranging from 1 to 7, with 1=bad and 7 = very good
Up to 60 days
Assessment of functional status
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change in the patient's functional status by the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS), which ranges from 100% to 0%, where 100% means no evidence of disease and 0% means death
Up to 60 days
Assessment of progression of disease status
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change in disease status using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale, ranging from 0 to 5, where 0 = completely active and 5 =dead
Up to 60 days
Assessment of patient's clinical-functional status
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change in clinical-functional status by the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), which ranges from 100 to 0%, where 100% = good clinical-functional status and 0%= dead
Up to 60 days
Assessment of disease prognosis
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Change in survival time by the Palliative Prognosis Scale (PPI), which assesses PPS, presence of delirium, dyspnea, oral intake and edema, where each factor presents a score and at the end the scores are summed and the patient is classified into group A (Total Score < 2.0): > 6 weeks survival, group B (Total Score between 2.0 - 4.0): 3 - 6 weeks survival and group C (Total Score > 4.0): < 3 weeks survival
Up to 60 days
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Time Frame: Up to 60 days

For cost-effectiveness analysis, a direct cost analysis using the cost-effectiveness ratio will be used. The costs considered in this study will be the direct non-medical and direct medical costs. For direct cost analysis, the microcosting technique will be used.

For economic analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) will be used. Once a CERI is obtained, the result is evaluated by defining a cost-effectiveness threshold, which aims to identify values that society considers feasible, from an economic point of view, to be incorporated as additional costs in society's spending on health (BRASIL, 2014).

Once the RCEI is obtained, the next step in a pharmacoeconomic analysis will be to perform a sensitivity analysis of the parameters involved during the research.

Up to 60 days
Quantify the plasma concentration of morphine
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
Patients will undergo blood draws to obtain plasma, 1:30h after taking morphine (oral or epidural) which will later be quantified for morphine by gas chromatography.
Up to 60 days
Correlating plasma morphine concentration with therapeutic effecs
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
The amount of morphine found in plasma (outcome 8) will be correlated with the therapeutic effects (pain levels by Visual Analog Scale)
Up to 60 days
Quantify brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF)
Time Frame: Up to 60 days
BDNF quantification will be done in the plasma of the patients, using the BDNF enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit from sigma and adverse effects
Up to 60 days

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Larissa LT Pacheco, PhD, Universidade Federal de Alfenas

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

April 1, 2018

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

December 31, 2022

Study Completion (Anticipated)

August 1, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 13, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 23, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

September 28, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

September 28, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 23, 2022

Last Verified

September 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Quality of Life

Clinical Trials on Control Group (Oral morphine)

3
Subscribe