Comparison of TTS-fentanyl with sustained-release oral morphine in the treatment of patients not using opioids for mild-to-moderate pain

SUMMARY Objective: This randomised, multicentre, direct open comparative trial evaluated the efficacy, treatment convenience, tolerability and safety aspects of transdermal therapeutic system (TTS)-fentanyl and sustained-release oral morphine (SRM) in both opioid-naïve patients with moderate-to-seve...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Current medical research and opinion 2003, Vol.19 (6), p.457-469
Hauptverfasser: van Seventer, R., Smit, J. M., Schipper, R. M., Wicks, M. A., Zuurmond, W. W. A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:SUMMARY Objective: This randomised, multicentre, direct open comparative trial evaluated the efficacy, treatment convenience, tolerability and safety aspects of transdermal therapeutic system (TTS)-fentanyl and sustained-release oral morphine (SRM) in both opioid-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain and in patients who had already been using opioids for mild-to-moderate pain. The two treatment groups were run in parallel. Special attention was paid to constipation, nausea/vomiting, drowsiness and respiratory depression. Patients and methods: The 131 enrolled patients started the 4-week treatment at low doses of opioid (25 μg/h TTS-fentanyl for 3 days or 30 mg SRM every 12 h) and were individually titrated. Tolerability, efficacy and safety were assessed throughout the study period. Frequency of constipation was the primary study variable and accordingly the study was powered for this. Both patients and investigators made a global treatment evaluation. Results: TTS-fentanyl and SRM were shown to be equally effective. Pain control and sleep quality improved with both treatments. None of the patients developed respiratory depression. Statistically significantly more patients in the SRM treatment group discontinued the trial prematurely (59% vs 27%; p 
ISSN:0300-7995
1473-4877
DOI:10.1185/030079903125002045