4 resultados para opioids
em DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center
Resumo:
Background: Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom among patients with advanced cancer. The role of bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP) and Vapotherm in the relief of dyspnea have not been well defined. We aimed to determine and to compare the efficacy of BIPAP and VapoTherm for cancer related dyspnea. Methods: In this randomized, open-label, crossover study, we randomly assigned advanced cancer patients with persistent dyspnea >=3/10 to either Vapotherm for 2 hours followed by BiPAP for 2 hours, or BiPAP followed by Vaptherm. A variable washout period was instituted between interventions. The primary end point was change in numeric rating scale before and after each intervention. We planned to enroll 50 patients in total. Results: Among the 803 patients screened over the last 8 months, 62 (26%) were eligible, and 16 (2%) were enrolled so far. Five patients completed the entire study successfully, 4 discontinued the study prematurely due to prolonged relief of dyspnea, and 7 dropped out for various reasons, including inability to tolerate BiPAP (N=3), anxiety (N=2), fatigue (N=1) and pain requiring opioids (N=1). The median baseline numeric rating score for dyspnea was 7/10 (interquartile range (IQR) 5-8), and the median baseline Borg score was 4/10 (3-7). Interim analysis revealed that BiPAP was associated with a median change in numeric rating score of -3 (N=10, IQR -6.3 to -1, p=0.007) and modified Borg score of -1 (N=10, IQR -3 to 0.3, p=0.058), while Vapotherm was associated with a median change in numeric rating score of -2 (N=9, IQR -3 to -1, p=0.011) and modified Borg score of -2.5 (N=8, IQR -5.5 to -0.1, p=0.051). Among the 5 individuals who completed the entire study, 2 preferred Vapotherm, 2 favored BiPAP, and 1 liked both. The respiratory rate decreased and the oxygen saturation improved with both interventions. No significant toxicities were observed. Conclusions: We were successfully able to enroll patients onto this clinic trial. Our preliminary results suggest that BiPAP and Vapotherm are highly efficacious in providing relief for patients with persistent refractory dyspnea. A direct comparison of the two interventions will be done upon study completion. Further research is necessary to confirm our findings.
Resumo:
Opioids remain the drugs of choice in chronic pain treatment, but opioid tolerance, defined as a decrease in analgesic effect after prolonged or repeated use, dramatically limits their clinical utility. Opioid tolerance has classically been studied by implanting spinal catheters in animals for drug administration. This procedure has significant morbidity and mortality, as well as causing an inflammatory response which decreases the potency of opioid analgesia and possibly affects tolerance development. Therefore, we developed and validated a new method, intermittent lumbar puncture (Dautzenberg et al.), for the study of opioid analgesia and tolerance. Using this method, opioid tolerance was reliably induced without detectable morbidity. The dose of morphine needed to induce analgesia and tolerance using this method was about 100-fold lower than that required when using an intrathecal catheter. Only slight inflammation was found at the injection site, dissipated within seven mm. ^ DAMGO, an opioid μ receptor agonist, has been reported to inhibit morphine tolerance, but results from different studies are inconclusive. We evaluated the effect of DAMGO on morphine tolerance using our newly-developed ILP method, as well as other intrathecal catheter paradigms. We found that co-administration of sub-analgesic DAMGO with morphine using ILP did not inhibit morphine tolerance, but instead blocked the analgesic effects of morphine. Tolerance to morphine still developed. Tolerance to morphine can only be blocked by sub-analgesic dose of DAMGO when administered in a lumbar catheter, but not in cervical catheter settings. ^ Finally, we evaluated the effects of Gabapentin (GBP) on analgesia and morphine tolerance. We demonstrated that GBP enhanced analgesia mediated by both subanalgesic and analgesic doses of morphine although GBP itself was not analgesic. GBP increased potency and efficacy of morphine. GBP inhibited the expression, but not the development, of morphine tolerance. GBP blocked tolerance to analgesic morphine but not to subanalgesic morphine. GBP reversed the expression of morphine tolerance even after tolerance was established. These studies may begin to provide new insights into mechanisms of morphine tolerance development and improve clinical chronic pain management. ^
Resumo:
Opioids dominate the field of pain management because of their ability to provide analgesia in many medical circumstances. However, side effects including respiratory depression, constipation, tolerance, physical dependence, and the risk of addiction limit their clinical utility. Fear of these side effects results in the under-treatment of acute pain. For many years, research has focused on ways to improve the therapeutic index (the ratio of desirable analgesic effects to undesirable side effects) of opioids. One strategy, combining opioid agonists that bind to different opioid receptor types, may prove successful.^ We discovered that subcutaneous co-administration of a moderately analgesic dose of the mu-opioid receptor (MOR) selective agonist fentanyl (20μg/kg) with subanalgesic doses of the less MOR-specific agonist morphine (100ng/kg-100μg/kg), augmented acute fentanyl analgesia in rats. Parallel [35S]GTPγS binding studies using naïve rat substantia gelatinosa membrane treated with fentanyl (4μM) and morphine (1nM-1pM) demonstrated a 2-fold increase in total G-protein activation. This correlation between morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activation led to our proposal that interactions between MORs and DORs underlie opioid-induced augmentation. We discovered that morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activity was mediated by DORs. Adding the DOR-selective antagonist naltrindole (200ng/kg, 40nM) at doses that did not alter the analgesic or G-protein activation of fentanyl, blocked increases in analgesia and G-protein activation induced by fentanyl/morphine combinations. Equivalent doses of the MOR-selective antagonist cyprodime (20ng/kg, 4nM) did not block augmentation. Substitution of the DOR-selective agonist SNC80 for morphine yielded similar results, further supporting our conclusion that interactions between MORs and DORs are responsible for morphine-induced augmentation of fentanyl analgesia and G-protein activation. Confocal microscopy of rat substantia gelatinosa showed that changes in the rate of opioid receptor internalization did not account for these effects.^ In conclusion, fentanyl analgesia augmentation by subanalgesic morphine is mediated by increased G-protein activation resulting from functional interactions between MORs and DORs, not changes in MOR internalization. Additional animal and clinical studies are needed to determine whether side effect incidence changes following opioid co-administration. If side effect incidence decreases or remains unchanged, these findings could have important implications for clinical pain treatment. ^
Resumo:
Opioids are drugs with opium-like qualities that are either derived from opiates (drugs created from opium, such as morphine or codeine) or chemically produced. In the U.S. opiate abuse and related deaths have been increasing and traditional maintenance treatment has been Methadone with variable success. However, since 2003 synthetic Buprenorphine has been used since it is prescribed daily by physicians in pill form and should improve outcomes. Comparative studies are limited and the effect of ethnicity on treatment outcome is unknown. ^ Data collected at one clinic from December 2005 through May 2009 were used to compare the association between ethnicity and other socioeconomic variables with treatment status, and to identify factors associated with the dropout among participants. Descriptive tables and multiple logistic regression models were used to examine the data on 1,295 total participants. Of the total, 875 participants (68%) were from the Methadone subsample and 420 participants (32%) from the Buprenorphine subsample; only about 15% stayed in treatment. ^ This study showed that with either Methadone or Buprenorphine maintenance therapy, only about 15% participants stay active over 3.5 years. Methadone treated patients that stayed active in treatment were associated with Caucasian ethnicity and were more likely to be employed. With Buprenorphine maintenance treatment only age over 40 years was associated with continuing activity in the program. Further studies that examine the reasons for the high dropout status and the implication of the socioeconomic and ethnic associations found in this data may help to improve treatment outcomes.^