Effectiveness and tolerability of transdermal buprenorphine patches: a multicenter, prospective, open-label study in Asian patients with moderate to severe chronic musculoskeletal pain

Do Heum Yoon, Seong-Il Bin, Simon Kin-Cheong Chan, Chun Kee Chung, Yong In, Hyoungmin Kim, Juan Javier Lichauco, Chi Chiu Mok, Young-Wan Moon, Tony Kwun-Tung Ng, Ester Gonzales Penserga, Dong Ah Shin, Dora You, Hanlim Moon, Do Heum Yoon, Seong-Il Bin, Simon Kin-Cheong Chan, Chun Kee Chung, Yong In, Hyoungmin Kim, Juan Javier Lichauco, Chi Chiu Mok, Young-Wan Moon, Tony Kwun-Tung Ng, Ester Gonzales Penserga, Dong Ah Shin, Dora You, Hanlim Moon

Abstract

Background: We examined the effectiveness and tolerability of transdermal buprenorphine (TDB) treatment in real-world setting in Asian patients with musculoskeletal pain.

Methods: This was an open-label study conducted in Hong Kong, Korea, and the Philippines between June 2013 and April 2015. Eligible patients fulfilled the following criteria: 18 to 80 years of age; clinical diagnosis of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, low back pain, or joint/muscle pain; chronic non-malignant pain of moderate to severe intensity (Box-Scale-11 [BS-11] pain score ≥ 4), not adequately controlled with non-opioid analgesics and requiring an opioid for adequate analgesia; and no prior history of opioid treatment. Patients started with a 5 μg/h buprenorphine patch and were titrated as necessary to a maximum of 40 μg/h over a 6-week period to achieve optimal pain control. Patients continued treatment with the titrated dose for 11 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in BS-11 pain scores. Other endpoints included patients' sleep quality and quality of life as assessed by the 8-item Global Sleep Quality Assessment Scale (GSQA) questionnaire and the EuroQol Group 5-Dimension Self-Report Questionnaire-3 Level version (EQ-5D-3 L), respectively. Tolerability was assessed by collecting adverse events.

Results: A total of 114 eligible patients were included in the analysis. The mean BS-11 score at baseline was 6.2 (SD 1.6). Following initiation of TDB, there was a statistically significant improvement in BS-11 score from baseline to visit 3 (least squares [LS] mean change: -2.27 [95% CI -2.66 to -1.87]), which was maintained till the end of the study (visit 7) (LS mean change: -2.64 [95% -3.05 to -2.23]) (p < 0.0001 for both). The proportion of patients who rated sleep quality as 'good' increased from 14.0% at baseline to 26.9% at visit 6. By visit 6, the mean EQ VAS score increased by 7.7 units (SD 17.9). There were also significant improvements in patients' levels of functioning for all EQ-5D-3 L dimensions from baseline at visit 6 (p < 0.05 for all). Seventy-eight percent of patients reported TEAEs and 22.8% of patients discontinued due to TEAEs. TEAEs were generally mild to moderate in intensity (96.5%).

Conclusions: TDB provides effective pain relief with an acceptable tolerability profile over the 11-week treatment period in Asian patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. More studies are needed to examine the long-term efficacy and safety of TBD treatment in this patient population.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01961271 . Registered 7 October 2013 (retrospectively registered; first patient was enrolled on 28 June 2013 and last patient last visit date was 26 Apr 2015).

Keywords: Asian; Chronic non-malignant pain; Effectiveness; Musculoskeletal; Pain score; Quality of life; Sleep quality; Tolerability; Transdermal buprenorphine.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by local ethics committees (ECs) and was conducted in accordance with the International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guideline, the Declaration of Helsinki, and applicable regulatory requirements. All eligible patients were invited to participate in the study. The physicians provided patients with oral and written information describing the nature, purpose, possible risk and benefits of the study. All patients provided written informed consent prior to participation in the study.

The local ECs that approved the study included (i) the Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong/Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster, Kowloon Central/Kowloon East Cluster Research Ethics Committee, Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong-New Territories East Cluster (CUHK-NTEC) Clinical Research Ethics Committee, and New Territories West (NTW) Cluster & Research Ethics Committee in Hong Kong; (ii) Asan Medical Center Institutional Review Board, Samsung Medical Center Institutional Review Board, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital Institutional Review Board, Severance Hospital Institutional Review Board, and Seoul National University Hospital Institutional Review Board in Korea; and (iii) Makati Medical Center Institutional Review Board, University of the Philippines Manila Research Ethics Board (UPMREB), St. Luke’s Institutional Ethics Review Committee (SL-IERC), and the University of Santo Tomas Hospital-Institutional Review Board (USTH-IRB).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

DHY, SIB, SKCC, CKC, YI, HK, CCM, YWM, TKTN, EGP, DAS, and JJL have received research funding from Mundipharma Pte Ltd., Singapore. JJL has also served on the advisory board for Pfizer and Novartis and has been on speaker bureaus for Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. DY is an employee of Mundipharma Pte Ltd., Singapore and HM is a former employee of Mundipharma Pte Ltd., Singapore.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flow of patients through the study
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Change in BS-11 scores from baseline to visit 7 (ITT population)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Comparison of patients’ levels of functioning for individual EQ-5D-3 L dimensions between baseline and visit 6 (ITT population)

References

    1. Croft P, Blyth FM, van der Windt D. Chronic pain as a topic for epidemiology and public health. In: Croft P, Blyth FM, van der Windt D, editors. Chronic pain epidemiology. Oxford University Press: Academic; 2010. pp. 3–8.
    1. Zhang W, Moskowitz RW, Nuki G, Abramson S, Altman RD, Arden N, et al. OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2008;16:137–162. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.12.013.
    1. Furlan AD. Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and side effects. Can Med Assoc J. 2006;174:1589–1594. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.051528.
    1. Kalso E, Edwards JE, Moore AR, McQuay HJ. Opioids in chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review of efficacy and safety. Pain. 2004;112:372–380. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.019.
    1. Ling W, Mooney L, Hillhouse M. Prescription opioid abuse, pain and addiction: clinical issues and implications. Drug and alcohol review. 2011;30:300–305. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-3362.2010.00271.x.
    1. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain--United States, 2016. JAMA. 2016;315:1624–1645. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.1464.
    1. Busse JW, Craigie S, Juurlink DN, Buckley DN, Wang L, Couban RJ, et al. Guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain. CMAJ. 2017;189:E659–E666. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.170363.
    1. O'Brien T, Christrup LL, Drewes AM, Fallon MT, Kress HG, McQuay HJ, et. al. European pain federation position paper on appropriate opioid use in chronic pain management. Eur J Pain 2017;21:3–19.
    1. Brennan MJ. Update on prescription extended-release opioids and appropriate patient selection. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2013;6:265–280. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S38562.
    1. Pergolizzi JV, Jr, Scholten W, Smith KJ, Leighton-Scott J, Willis JC, Henningfield JE. The unique role of transdermal buprenorphine in the global chronic pain epidemic. Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwanica. 2015;53:71–76. doi: 10.1016/j.aat.2015.06.001.
    1. Likar R. Transdermal buprenorphine in the management of persistent pain – safety aspects. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2006;2:115–125.
    1. Kress HG. Clinical update on the pharmacology, efficacy and safety of transdermal buprenorphine. Eur J of Pain. 2009;13:219–230. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2008.04.011.
    1. Norspan® Package insert. Mundipharma (Hong Kong) Limited, Hong Kong, 2011.
    1. Norspan® Summary of product characteristics. Mundipharma Korea Ltd., Korea 2013.
    1. Norspan® Patient information leaflet. Mundipharma Distribution GmbH (Philippine Branch), Philippines, 2010.
    1. Hoskin PJ, Hanks GW. Opioid agonist-antagonist drugs in acute and chronic pain states. Drugs. 1991;41:326–344. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199141030-00002.
    1. Dahan A, Yassen A, Romberg R, Sarton E, Teppema L, Olofsen E, et. al. Buprenorphine induces ceiling in respiratory depression but not in analgesia. Br J Anaesth 2006;96:627–632.
    1. Pergolizzi J, Aloisi AM, Dahan A, Filitz J, Langford R, Likar R, et al. Current knowledge of buprenorphine and its unique pharmacological profile. Pain Pract. 2010;10:428–450. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2010.00378.x.
    1. Al-Tawil N, Odar-Cederlof I, Berggren AC, Johnson HE, Persson J. Pharmacokinetics of transdermal buprenorphine patch in the elderly. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69:143–149. doi: 10.1007/s00228-012-1320-8.
    1. Filitz J, Griessinger N, Sittl R, Likar R, Schüttler J, Koppert W. Effects of intermittent hemodialysis on buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine plasma concentrations in chronic pain patients treated with transdermal buprenorphine. Eur J of Pain. 2006;10:743–748. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2005.12.001.
    1. Pergolizzi J, Böger RH, Budd K, Dahan A, Erdine S, Hans G, et al. Opioids and the management of chronic severe pain in the elderly: consensus statement of an international expert panel with focus on the six clinically most often used World Health Organization step III opioids (buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone) Pain Pract. 2008;8:287–313. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2008.00204.x.
    1. Hans G, Robert D. Transdermal buprenorphine - a critical appraisal of its role in pain management. J Pain Res. 2009;2:117–134. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S6503.
    1. Conaghan PG, O’Brien CM, Wilson M, Schofield JP. Transdermal buprenorphine plus oral paracetamol vs an oral codeine-paracetamol combination for osteoarthritis of hip and/or knee: a randomised trial. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2011;19:930–938. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.03.011.
    1. Gordon A, Rashiq S, Moulin DE, Clark AJ, Beaulieu AD, Eisenhoffer J, et al. Buprenorphine transdermal system for opioid therapy in patients with chronic low back pain. Pain Res Manag. 2010;15:169–178. doi: 10.1155/2010/216725.
    1. Karlsson M, Berggren A-C. Efficacy and safety of low-dose transdermal buprenorphine patches (5, 10, and 20 μg/h) versus prolonged-release tramadol tablets (75, 100, 150, and 200 mg) in patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain: a 12-week, randomized, open-label, controlled, parallel-group noninferiority study. Clinl Ther. 2009;31:503–513. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.03.001.
    1. Karlsson J, Soderstrom A, Augustini BG, Berggren AC. Is buprenorphine transdermal patch equally safe and effective in younger and elderly patients with osteoarthritis-related pain? Results of an age-group controlled study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30:575–587. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2013.873714.
    1. Jensen MP, Karoly P, O'Riordan EF, Bland F, Jr, Burns RS. The subjective experience of acute pain. An assessment of the utility of 10 indices. Clin J Pain. 1989;5:153–159. doi: 10.1097/00002508-198906000-00005.
    1. The EuroQol Group EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9.
    1. Ferguson L, Scheman J. Patient global impression of change scores within the context of a chronic pain rehabilitation program. J Pain. 2009;10:S73. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2009.01.258.
    1. Busner J, Targum SD. The clinical global impressions scale: applying a research tool in clinical practice. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2007;4:28–37.
    1. Farrar JT, Young JP, Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
    1. Burroughs VJ, Maxey RW, Levy RA. Racial and ethnic differences in response to medicines: towards individualized pharmaceutical treatment. J Natl Medl Assoc. 2002;94:1–26.
    1. Gordon A, Callaghan D, Spink D, Cloutier C, Dzongowski P, O'Mahony W, et al. Buprenorphine transdermal system in adults with chronic low back pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, followed by an open-label extension phase. Clin Ther. 2010;32:844–860. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.04.018.
    1. Chou R, Fanciullo GJ, Fine PG, Adler JA, Ballantyne JC, Davies P, et al. American pain society-American Academy of pain medicine opioids guidelines panel. Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. J Pain. 2009;10:113–130. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2008.10.008.
    1. Caraceni A, Hanks G, Kaasa S, Bennett MI, Brunelli C, Cherny N, et al. Use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of cancer pain: evidence-based recommendations from the EAPC. The Lancet Oncology. 2012;13:e58–e68. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70040-2.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel