盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗晚期癌症疼痛的临床应用

目的:观察盐酸羟考酮控释片(奥施康定)治疗晚期癌症中、重度疼痛的临床效果、不良反应及患者生活质量的改善情况.方法:68例中、重度疼痛患者给予奥施康定镇痛治疗,初始剂量10ms/12h,正在用吗啡类镇痛药者,按照吗啡1/2剂量换算.根据疼痛情况调整剂量,直至患者无痛或基本无痛,每位患者至少治疗15d以上,同时进行疼痛强度、生活质量评分及不良反应观察.结果:奥施康定的最终滴定剂量为:≤30 mg/d的30例(44.1%),31～60 mg/d的16例(23.5%),61～120 mg/d的18例(26.5%),≥120 mg/d的4例(5.9%).总疼痛缓解率为95.6%,其中完全缓解27例(39.7%),明显缓解33例(48.5%),中度缓解5例(7.4%).患者生活质量明显提高,不良反应少且轻微.结论:盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗中、重度癌性疼痛疗效显著,不良反应较少,能显著改善癌症患者的生活质量.     

羟考酮控释片联合双膦酸盐治疗骨转移癌69例

背景:盐酸羟考酮控释片属于第3阶梯用药,是治疗中重度癌痛的主要方法之一.目的:观察盐酸羟考酮控释片联合双膦酸盐治疗骨转移癌性疼痛的疗效及不良反应.方法:对69例骨转移癌患者口服盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗,在用药过程中根据疼痛缓解程度调整剂量;同时静脉滴注唑来膦酸4mg每4周1次,连续2次后评价疗效和不良反应.结果与结论:发现骨转移癌患者的骨痛完全缓解25例(36%),部分缓解37例(54%),轻度缓解7例(10%),总有效率为90%(62/69);不良反应有便秘、恶心呕吐、腹胀、厌食、嗜睡、头晕、发热、肌肉痛等.结果表明,盐酸羟考酮控释片联合双膦酸盐治疗骨转移癌性疼痛疗效确切,有效率高,不良反应轻,患者可以耐受.     

盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗中重度癌痛疗效观察

目的观察盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗中重度癌痛的疗效及不良反应。方法 56例中重度癌痛患者均给予盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗,初始剂量为10～20mg/次,1次/12h,口服,并依据患者疼痛缓解程度不同逐渐增加剂量至疼痛缓解,观察服药14d患者疼痛评分、疼痛缓解率及不良反应。结果患者治疗前、后疼痛评分分别为(7.59±1.33),(1.68±1.48)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);治疗后疼痛轻度缓解5例(8.9%),中度缓解32例(57.1%),完全缓解19例(33.9%),疼痛缓解有效率为91.1%;治疗过程中发生便秘17例(30.3%),恶心呕吐8例(14.3%),腹胀7例(12.5%)、厌食8例(14.3%)、头晕3例(5.3%)、嗜睡8例(14.3%)、一过性排尿困难5例(8.9%)。结论盐酸羟考酮控释片个体化给药用于中重度癌痛镇痛效果满意,不良反应可耐受。     

盐酸羟考酮控释片及硫酸吗啡缓释片治疗晚期恶性肿瘤重度疼痛的临床观察

目的分析盐酸羟考酮控释片及硫酸吗啡缓释片治疗晚期恶性肿瘤重度疼痛的疗效。方法选取2018年5月至2019年7月商丘市第五人民医院诊治的恶性肿瘤的患者70例,按照住院号尾号奇偶数随机分成研究组和对照组,每组35例。研究组给予盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗,对照组给予硫酸吗啡缓释片治疗。观察两组患者镇痛效果和患者及家属的满意程度、治疗前后生活质量。结果两组患者在经过药物治疗后疼痛效果均明显减轻,研究组治疗总有效率为97. 14%(34/35),对照组为97. 14%(34/35),差异未见统计学意义(P 0. 05);盐酸羟考酮控释片起效更快,一般情况都可以在1 h之内起效,而硫酸吗啡缓释片则需要2～3 h,但都无严重毒副作用发生。研究组(100. 00%,35/35)和对照组(94. 28%,33/35)的患者及家属满意程度也显著增高(P 0. 05)。结论盐酸羟考酮控释片和硫酸吗啡缓释片治疗晚期恶性肿瘤重度疼痛均有显著疗效,盐酸羟考酮控释片疗效发挥时间较硫酸吗啡缓释片更快,副作用较少,安全性高。     

盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗癌痛不良反应的观察及护理

盐酸羟考酮(奥施康定)镇痛强度是吗啡的2倍,药效作用个体间差异较小,其口服生物利用度是常用阿片类药物中最高的,为吗啡2～3倍[1]。2004年3-11月,我科应用盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗中、重度癌痛患者22例,其目的为观察该药对中、重度癌性疼痛的止痛效果及不良反应。其中21例患者占90     

羟考酮缓释片、吗啡缓释片治疗重度癌痛的效果

目的:探究羟考酮缓释片、吗啡缓释片治疗重度癌痛的效果及对患者生活质量的影响。方法:采用随机数字法将2016年1月～2019年3月收治的重度癌痛患者78例分为羟考酮组与吗啡组,各39例,分别采用羟考酮缓释片、吗啡缓释片治疗。比较两组疼痛缓解总有效率、起效时间、不良反应发生情况及生活质量评分。结果:两组疼痛缓解率比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);羟考酮组起效时间短于吗啡组,便秘发生率低于吗啡组(P0.05);用药7 d后,两组生活质量评分均较用药前提高(P0.05),但两组用药后生活质量评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:羟考酮缓释片与吗啡缓释片缓解恶性肿瘤重度癌痛的疗效相当,但羟考酮缓释片起效更快,便秘等不良反应更轻微。     

盐酸羟考酮缓释片联合吗啡片滴定中重度癌痛的临床观察

目的:探讨盐酸羟考酮缓释片联合即释吗啡片滴定癌痛的疗效及不良反应。方法:80例住院中重度癌痛患者应用盐酸羟考酮缓释片联合即释吗啡片滴定,记录患者所需个体化剂量,统计滴定开始后24小时、3天、7天疼痛控制有效率,滴定前、后的疼痛强度变化生活质量变化以及滴定中不良反应。生活质量评价采用EORTC QLQ-C30(v3.0)量表。疼痛强度评分应用数字分级法。结果:80例患者滴定剂量为20 mg/d至200 mg/d。76.3%的患者在滴定后3天内达到稳定剂量。滴定24小时后疼痛控制有效率为70.0%,3天达到76.3%,7天达到91.3%。滴定后7天评价患者总体生命质量、躯体功能、情感功能较滴定前明显改善(P<0.05);滴定中毒副反应主要为便秘(58.8%)、恶心呕吐(40.2%)、口干(17.5%)、头晕(12.5%)、厌食(11.1%)、尿潴留(8.8%)、瘙痒(6.5%)、谵妄5例(6.3%),嗜睡3例(3.8%),经过对症处理均可耐受。结论:盐酸羟考酮缓释片联合即释吗啡片滴定中重度癌痛患者达到良好滴定效果,副反应较轻,明显改善患者生活质量。     

盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗癌性疼痛的临床效果观察

目的:观察盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗癌性疼痛的临床效果.方法:回顾性分析34例癌症患者的临床资料,所有患者均伴有中度或重度疼痛,所有患者均口服盐酸羟考酮控释片进行治疗,统计镇痛效果及不良反应.结果:34例癌症患者经过治疗达到CR及PR标准者30例,CR+PR比例为88.24％.34例患者中出现便秘10例,头晕、恶心7例,呕吐2例,嗜睡2例,所有不良反应经过对症治疗后均有所好转.结论:针对癌性疼痛患者,盐酸羟考酮控释片镇痛效果好,安全性高,具有较高的临床应用价值.     

盐酸羟考酮控释片和芬太尼透皮贴剂治疗中-重度癌痛的临床疗效及不良反应

目的探究中-重度癌痛患者行芬太尼透皮贴剂和盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗的临床疗效及不良反应。方法选取辽阳石化总医院2015-01—2016-01收治的中-重度癌痛患者96例进行回顾性分析,根据治疗时所用不同治疗方案分成两组,将行盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗42例患者设为对照组,将行芬太尼透皮贴剂治疗54例患者设为观察组,对两组生活质量干扰情况、疼痛状况与不良反应进行对比。结果两组治疗前后精神状况、食欲、生活兴趣与睡眠评分对比差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组治疗后疼痛缓解率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);观察组便秘发生率3.70%比对照组19.05%低,且皮肤过敏发生率12.96%比对照组0高(P0.05)。结论中-重度癌痛患者行芬太尼透皮贴剂和盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗效果相当,临床医师可按照患者具体病情灵活运用,减少不良反应发生。     

奥施康定治疗中重度癌痛的疗效观察及安全评估

目的:现察奥施康定(盐酸羟考酮控释片)治疗中重度癌痛的近期疗效和不良反应.方法:内脏痛、骨转移痛、侵犯和压迫神经痛、皮肤黏膜痛等慢性癌性疼痛42例,应用奥施康定片剂治疗,记录疗效及治疗期间便秘、恶心呕吐、嗜睡,头痛、呼吸抑制等不良反应出现的情况.结果:总有效率为88.1%(37/42),不良反应有便秘28例(66.7%),忍心呕吐4例(9.5%),其他有嗜睡、头晕、腹胀、厌食,但发生率均<5%.结论:服用盐酸羟考酮控释片治疗中重度癌痛安全有效.     

奥施康定片治疗中、重度癌痛的临床观察与护理

目的观察奥施康定片对中、重度癌痛患者的止痛效果及不良反应。方法106例中、重度癌痛患者口服奥施康定片,记录治疗前后的疼痛强度、生活质量评分及不良反应。结果CR PR 102例,MR 3例,NR 1例。不良反应有便秘、恶心呕吐、嗜睡、头晕乏力等,发生率低。结论奥施康定片能有效控制癌性疼痛,改善生活质量,且不良反应轻微,发生率低。     

芬太尼透皮贴剂治疗老年人晚期癌痛的观察

目的 观察芬太尼透皮贴剂对＞70岁老年晚期癌痛病人止痛效果,及其不良反应。方法观察42例年龄＞70岁的晚期肿瘤并中度以上疼痛患者,使用芬太尼透皮贴的疗效及不良反应、合适剂量及其安全性。结累 完全缓解（CR）32例,部分缓解（PR）8例,轻度缓解（MR）2例,总有效率100％,CR＋PR95．25％;不良反应有头晕、嗜睡、恶心、呕吐、便秘。结论 芬太尼透皮贴能有效的控制老年晚期肿瘤患者中度以上疼痛,剂量以2．5mg为常用,特别适用于不能口服药物及使用吗啡控释片出现严重不良反应者,不良反应较少,多在一周内消失,老年病人使用安全,能有效地提高老年肿瘤病人的生存质量．     

One-year tolerability and efficacy of sumatriptan nasal spray in adolescents with migraine: results of a multicenter, open-label study

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the 1-year tolerability and efficacy of sumatriptan nasal spray (NS) at doses of 5, 10, and 20 mg for the treatment of acute migraine in adolescents. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, 1-year, multiple-attack study. Adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with a > or =6-month history of migraine with or without aura, 2 to 8 moderate or severe migraines per month, and a typical migraine duration of > or =4 hours were eligible for participation. After initial treatment with sumatriptan 10 mg, the dose could be adjusted down to 5 mg or up to 20 mg at the investigator's discretion to optimize tolerability or efficacy. Patients could treat an unlimited number of moderate or severe migraine attacks, provided there was a 24-hour headache-free period between treated attacks and a 2-hour period between doses of sumatriptan NS. A second dose of sumatriptan NS was available for headache recurrence 2 to 24 hours after initial treatment; no more than 2 doses could be used within a 24-hour period. Adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiographic and physical findings, and laboratory variables were assessed. Headache response (reduction of moderate/severe predose pain to mild/no pain) and pain-free response (reduction of moderate/severe predose pain to no pain) were reported by patients 2 hours after dosing. RESULTS: A total of 437 patients treated > or =1 migraine; 3272 total attacks were treated, with 3675 drug exposures (mean, 1.1 dose/attack). Patients had a mean age of 14.1 years, 91% were white, and 53% were female. Seven patients used the 5-mg dose; meaningful conclusions concerning this dose could not be made. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 33% of attacks with the 10-mg dose and 31% with the 20-mg dose; most were related to taste disturbance. Adverse events did not increase with a second dose or over time. Four percent (16/437) of patients withdrew due to drug-related adverse events. One serious adverse event, a facial-nerve ischemic event (10-mg dose), was considered drug related. No drug-related changes in vital signs or electrocardiographic findings were observed. Headache response 2 hours after dosing was reported by 76% of patients taking the 10-mg dose and 72% of those taking the 20-mg dose. Pain-free response 2 hours after dosing was reported by 43% and 40% of patients in the 10- and 20-mg groups, respectively. Conclusions: Based on these results, sumatriptan NS at doses of 10 and 20 mg was well tolerated and effective in the 1-year treatment of multiple migraine attacks in adolescents.     

Consistent efficacy and tolerability of almotriptan in the acute treatment of multiple migraine attacks: results of a large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

In this double-blind study, the efficacy and tolerability of a single dose of almotriptan (6.25 or 12.5 mg) was compared with placebo in the treatment of three consecutive migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity. Of 1013 randomized patients, 722 evaluable patients completed the study. The total number of attacks relieved (severe or moderate pain reduced to mild or no pain) at 2 h post-dose was significantly higher (P < 0.001) after treatment with almotriptan 6.25 or 12.5 mg compared with placebo (60% and 70% vs. 38%, respectively). Moreover, a consistent response was achieved across and within patients for almotriptan 6.25 or 12.5 mg compared with placebo (pain relief in at least two out of three attacks within 2 h for 64% and 75% vs. 36%, respectively) and less than one-third of the patients relapsed within 24 h. Almotriptan was well tolerated with no significant differences between the almotriptan and placebo treatment groups in the percentage of patients reporting adverse events. Overall, the 12.5-mg dose was associated with the most favourable efficacy/tolerability ratio and is, therefore, the recommended dose.     

Pilot study evaluating preference for 3-mg versus 6-mg subcutaneous sumatriptan

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous sumatriptan (6 mg) is undeniably an excellent treatment of migraine. However, some patients have avoided using 6 mg sumatriptan because of unpleasant or unwanted side effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous sumatriptan (3 mg) during a moderate or severe migraine attack. METHODS: Thirty subcutaneous sumatriptan-naive patients with a history of migraine with and without aura treated their next two moderate or severe migraines with either 3-mg or 6-mg sumatriptan injection. The primary endpoint was whether patients preferred the low-dose (3 mg) or the high-dose (6 mg) subcutaneous sumatriptan. Other objectives included percentage of patients pain free at 15 and 30 minutes, 1 and 2 hours; a pain-free response lasting between 2 and 24 hours, patient satisfaction, and acceptability of formulation. A new combination endpoint (efficacy and lack of significant side effects) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty percent of patients preferred 3-mg over 6-mg subcutaneous sumatriptan. At 1 hour postdose 57% of patients were pain free with 3 mg and 53% with 6 mg. At 2 hours postdose 87% were pain free with 3 mg and 80% with 6 mg. A sustained pain-free response was obtained by 70 to 80% of patients. When combining a pain-free response at 2 hours and a sustained pain-free response at 24 hours with no significant side effects, more patients met the endpoint with 3 mg (63 to 67%) than with 6 mg (33 to 50%). CONCLUSIONS: Combining efficacy and tolerability endpoints may be clinically meaningful and reflective of real-world expectations. In some patients, a lower dose of sumatriptan injection may be beneficial.     

Effect of early intervention with sumatriptan on migraine pain: retrospective analyses of data from three clinical trials

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy of sumatriptan 50- and 100-mg tablets in the treatment of migraine attacks while the pain is mild rather than moderate/severe. BACKGROUND: Results from The Spectrum Study suggested that early treatment of migraine attacks with sumatriptan 50-mg tablets while the pain is mild might enhance pain-free response and reduce headache recurrence. METHODS: Retrospective analyses of headaches treated during mild pain were performed using data from 3 studies of sumatriptan tablets (protocols S2CM09, S2BT25, and S2BT26). Our primary interest was pain-free response 2 and 4 hours after dosing; secondary interests were use of a second dose of medication, clinical disability (as measured on a 4-point disability scale), migraine-associated symptoms, meaningful pain relief (patient defined), time to meaningful relief, sustained pain-free response, and proportion of attacks in which pain had worsened 2 and 4 hours after dosing, all of which were compared in headaches treated during mild versus moderate/severe pain. RESULTS: In S2CM09, 92 patients treated 118 headaches during mild pain. Rates of pain-free response were higher 2 hours after dosing with sumatriptan 50 mg (51%) or 100 mg (67%; P < 0.05) compared with placebo (28%), and were higher with early treatment of mild pain compared with treatment of moderate/severe pain at 2 hours (sumatriptan 50 mg: mild pain, 51%; moderate/severe pain, 31%; P < 0.05; sumatriptan 100 mg: mild pain, 67%; moderate/severe pain, 36%) and 4 hours (50 mg: 75% vs 56%; 100 mg: 90% vs 61%; P < 0.05). Early intervention also resulted in less redosing than when moderate/severe pain was treated (50 mg: 21% vs 32%; 100 mg: 20% vs 29%). More attacks treated early with sumatriptan 50 or 100 mg were associated with normal function 4 hours after dosing compared with placebo (70% and 93% vs 46%, respectively). Sustained pain-free response rates 2 to 24 hours after early dosing with sumatriptan 50 or 100 mg were also higher (34% and 53%, respectively) compared with treatment of moderate/severe pain (19% and 24%, respectively). Early treatment with sumatriptan 100 mg produced significantly higher pain-free rates at 2 hours after dosing (P < 0.001) than did ergotamine plus caffeine (S2BT25: 69% vs 34%, respectively) or aspirin plus metoclopramide (S2BT26: 73% vs 25%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Sumatriptan 50- and 100-mg tablets are effective whether pain is mild or moderate/severe. However, treatment with sumatriptan while pain is mild provides high pain-free response rates while reducing the need for redosing, benefits not seen with ergotamine plus caffeine or aspirin plus metoclopramide.     

Early vs. non-early intervention in acute migraine-'Act when Mild (AwM)'. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of almotriptan

The study was designed to compare the response to almotriptan in migraine patients who take medication early in the course of the attack with that when medication is taken after pain has become moderate or severe. A randomized, four-arm, multicentre, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of almotriptan (12.5 mg) comparing treatment administration when pain intensity was mild and within 1 h of headache onset vs. pain that had become moderate or severe was conducted. Of 491 migraineurs enrolled, 403 were evaluable [intention-to-treat population (ITT)]. Their mean age was 38 years, 84% were female and they had a mean of 3.7 attacks/month. Of these patients, 10% did not take medication according to their randomly allocated basal pain intensity (mild or moderate/severe) and were subsequently reassigned to that group for this analysis-'Act when Mild (AwM)' group. In the almotriptan arms, 53% of mild basal pain and 38% of moderate/severe basal pain patients were pain free at 2 h (P = 0.03; primary end-point). Corresponding proportions in the placebo groups were 25% and 17% (statistically significant vs. respective almotriptan arms). Secondary end-points (ITT) were also significantly in favour of early intervention with almotriptan, both between and across treatment groups, such as sustained pain free: 45.6% vs. 30.5% (P = 0.02). Adverse events were reported in < 5% of treated patients in all groups (NS), with no serious events. Treatment with almotriptan while migraine pain is still mild provides statistically significant and clinically relevant enhancements in efficacy compared with treatment when pain has reached higher severity levels.     

沙利度胺联合地塞米松治疗初治多发性骨髓瘤疗效观察

目的 观察沙利度胺联合地塞米松方案治疗多发性骨髓瘤的疗效及其不良反应.方法 对18例初治多发性骨髓瘤患者进行沙利度胺联合地塞米松治疗,沙利度胺治疗起始量为100 mg/d,每晚口服,根据患者耐受情况逐渐加量,每周增加100 mg/d,直到400 mg/d维持治疗;地塞米松40 mg/d,第1～4日,第9～12日,第17～20日分别静脉或口服给药,每28日为1个疗程.该方案治疗至少3个月.结果 完全缓解2例(11%),部分缓解4例(22%),进步8例(45%),无效4例(22%),总有效率78%.常见的不良反应为便秘、嗜睡、疲乏、水肿、指端麻木等.结论 沙利度胺联合地塞米松是治疗初治多发性骨髓瘤的有效治疗方案,不良反应少,耐受性好.     

Orale Opiattherapie bei Patienten mit “nicht-malignen” Schmerzen

Opioids are given for acute intra- and postope-rative pain relief or for chronic cancer pain. In the literature there are only rare and contradictory reports on the oral administration of opioids for chronic non-malignant pain. However, there is no reason to withhold strong analgesics for patients with severe pain. When all other thrapeutic measures fail to control pain, patients with non-malignant pain can also be treated by opioids. We report 70 patients with severe pain who were given opioids as the ultima ratio in pain therapy: 50 received buprenorphine sublingual tablets, 13 received morphine sustained release tablets and the remaining 7 were treated with other opioids. The mean daily dose was 1.45 mg buprenorphine or 87.6 mg morphine. The dosage increased in 12 of the 50 patients treated with buprenorphine while 5 of the 13 morphine patients needed increasing dosage. The other patients had a constant dosage after the initial period of dose-finding. In more than 50% the pain could be effectively controlled by oral opioids. The general performance status (Karnofsky) increased from 63.6% to 74.1%. The typical side effects were constipation and nausea. Prophylaxis of constipation is most important during opioid therapy. No case of respiratory depression or opioid addiction was registered. Our results show that patients with musculo-skeletal and deafferentation pain respond better to opioids than patients with headache. Negative results were observed in some patients with neuropathic pain. The results of the study show that opioids are justifiable for the treatment of non-malignant pain and can be given without danger over a long period of time. Side effects are controlled by additional medication. The principle of opioid administration is prophylaxis of pain -therefore, they should be given "by the clock". Opioids are not only indicated in malignant illness, but also according to severity of pain and by the failure of other measures to control pain.     

Efficacy and safety of controlled-release versus immediate-release oxycodone: randomized, double-blind evaluation in patients with chronic back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of controlled-release oxycodone given every 12 hours with immediate-release oxycodone given four times daily in patients with persistent back pain. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, two-period crossover trial. PATIENTS: Fifty-seven adult outpatients with stable, chronic, moderate-to-severe low back pain despite analgesic therapy were enrolled; 47 were randomized; 11 discontinued for side effects, most commonly nausea and vomiting. INTERVENTIONS: Controlled-release oxycodone tablets given every 12 hours; immediate-release oxycodone tablets given four times daily; dose titration with controlled-release or immediate-release for up to 10 days; double-blind treatment for 4-7 days each. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' pain scores (0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe). RESULTS: Pain intensity decreased from moderate to severe at baseline to slight at the end of titration with both oxycodone formulations. The daily oxycodone dose was 40 mg or less in 68% of patients. During double-blind treatment, mean pain intensity was maintained at 1.2 (0.1 SE) with controlled-release and at 1.1 (0.1 SE) with immediate-release oxycodone. The most common adverse events were constipation, nausea, pruritus, somnolence, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: Controlled-release oxycodone given every 12 hours was comparable with immediate-release oxycodone given four times daily in efficacy and safety, and it provides convenient, twice-daily, around-the-clock treatment for selected patients with persistent back pain that is inadequately controlled by nonopioids or as-needed opioid therapy.