曲马多-塞来昔布共晶体(CTC)对急性中度至重度疼痛患者的疗效:两项 3 期随机临床试验数据的汇总分析。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Drugs in Research & Development Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-14 DOI:10.1007/s40268-024-00469-3
Richard Langford, Eugene R Viscusi, Adelaida Morte, Jesús Cebrecos, Mariano Sust, José María Giménez-Arnau, Oscar de Leon-Casasola
{"title":"曲马多-塞来昔布共晶体(CTC)对急性中度至重度疼痛患者的疗效:两项 3 期随机临床试验数据的汇总分析。","authors":"Richard Langford, Eugene R Viscusi, Adelaida Morte, Jesús Cebrecos, Mariano Sust, José María Giménez-Arnau, Oscar de Leon-Casasola","doi":"10.1007/s40268-024-00469-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>New acute pain medications are needed that provide effective analgesia while minimizing side effects and opioid exposure. Clinical trials of co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) have demonstrated an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol or celecoxib alone. We pooled data from two phase 3 clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of CTC 200 mg twice daily (BID) in acute moderate-to-severe pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Efficacy data were pooled from STARDOM1 [acute pain following oral surgery (NCT02982161)] and ESTEVE-SUSA-301 [acute pain following bunionectomy (NCT03108482)]. The primary efficacy outcome was sum of pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 h (SPID<sub>0-48</sub>).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 344 patients received CTC 200 mg BID, 342 received tramadol 50 or 100 mg four times a day, 181 received celecoxib 100 mg BID, and 172 received placebo. The least-squares mean difference in SPID<sub>0-48</sub> was -21.8 (p = 0.002) for CTC versus tramadol and -72.8 (p < 0.001) for CTC versus placebo. A similar pattern of SPID<sub>0-48</sub> was observed with CTC versus comparator whether patients had moderate or severe pain at baseline. Reduction in pain intensity was faster and reached mild intensity earlier with CTC versus comparators. Patients were significantly (p ≤ 0.005) less likely to receive rescue medication within 4 or 48 h with CTC compared with tramadol or placebo.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This pooled analysis reinforces the efficacy profile of CTC versus tramadol and, given that CTC permits lower daily tramadol dosing and thereby reduces unnecessary opioid use, this highlights its improved benefit/risk profile and its potential for the management of moderate-to-severe pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":49258,"journal":{"name":"Drugs in Research & Development","volume":" ","pages":"239-252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11315862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Co-Crystal of Tramadol-Celecoxib (CTC) in Patients with Acute Moderate-to-Severe Pain: A Pooled Analysis of Data from Two Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Richard Langford, Eugene R Viscusi, Adelaida Morte, Jesús Cebrecos, Mariano Sust, José María Giménez-Arnau, Oscar de Leon-Casasola\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40268-024-00469-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>New acute pain medications are needed that provide effective analgesia while minimizing side effects and opioid exposure. Clinical trials of co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) have demonstrated an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol or celecoxib alone. We pooled data from two phase 3 clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of CTC 200 mg twice daily (BID) in acute moderate-to-severe pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Efficacy data were pooled from STARDOM1 [acute pain following oral surgery (NCT02982161)] and ESTEVE-SUSA-301 [acute pain following bunionectomy (NCT03108482)]. The primary efficacy outcome was sum of pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 h (SPID<sub>0-48</sub>).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 344 patients received CTC 200 mg BID, 342 received tramadol 50 or 100 mg four times a day, 181 received celecoxib 100 mg BID, and 172 received placebo. The least-squares mean difference in SPID<sub>0-48</sub> was -21.8 (p = 0.002) for CTC versus tramadol and -72.8 (p < 0.001) for CTC versus placebo. A similar pattern of SPID<sub>0-48</sub> was observed with CTC versus comparator whether patients had moderate or severe pain at baseline. Reduction in pain intensity was faster and reached mild intensity earlier with CTC versus comparators. Patients were significantly (p ≤ 0.005) less likely to receive rescue medication within 4 or 48 h with CTC compared with tramadol or placebo.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This pooled analysis reinforces the efficacy profile of CTC versus tramadol and, given that CTC permits lower daily tramadol dosing and thereby reduces unnecessary opioid use, this highlights its improved benefit/risk profile and its potential for the management of moderate-to-severe pain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49258,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drugs in Research & Development\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"239-252\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11315862/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drugs in Research & Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40268-024-00469-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs in Research & Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40268-024-00469-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目标:我们需要既能提供有效镇痛,又能最大限度减少副作用和阿片类药物暴露的新型急性疼痛药物。曲马多-塞来昔布联合晶体(CTC)的临床试验表明,与单独使用曲马多或塞来昔布相比,其疗效/风险状况有所改善。我们汇总了两项 3 期临床试验的数据,以评估 CTC 200 毫克、每日两次(BID)治疗急性中度至重度疼痛的疗效:我们汇总了 STARDOM1 [口腔手术后急性疼痛(NCT02982161)] 和 ESTEVE-SUSA-301 [拇囊炎切除术后急性疼痛(NCT03108482)] 的疗效数据。主要疗效结果为0至48小时疼痛强度差异总和(SPID0-48):共有 344 名患者接受了 CTC 200 毫克,每日两次;342 名患者接受了曲马多 50 或 100 毫克,每日四次;181 名患者接受了塞来昔布 100 毫克,每日两次;172 名患者接受了安慰剂。四氯化碳与曲马多相比,SPID0-48的最小二乘平均差为-21.8(p = 0.002);四氯化碳与安慰剂相比,SPID0-48的最小二乘平均差为-72.8(p < 0.001)。无论患者基线疼痛程度为中度还是重度,CTC 与对比药相比都观察到了类似的 SPID0-48 模式。与对照药相比,CTC 能更快地降低疼痛强度,并更早达到轻度疼痛强度。与曲马多或安慰剂相比,使用四氯化碳的患者在4或48小时内接受抢救药物治疗的可能性明显降低(p≤0.005):这项汇总分析加强了四氯化碳与曲马多的疗效对比,考虑到四氯化碳可以降低曲马多的日用量,从而减少不必要的阿片类药物使用,这凸显了四氯化碳更好的效益/风险对比及其在中度至重度疼痛治疗中的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Efficacy of Co-Crystal of Tramadol-Celecoxib (CTC) in Patients with Acute Moderate-to-Severe Pain: A Pooled Analysis of Data from Two Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Background and objectives: New acute pain medications are needed that provide effective analgesia while minimizing side effects and opioid exposure. Clinical trials of co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) have demonstrated an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol or celecoxib alone. We pooled data from two phase 3 clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of CTC 200 mg twice daily (BID) in acute moderate-to-severe pain.

Methods: Efficacy data were pooled from STARDOM1 [acute pain following oral surgery (NCT02982161)] and ESTEVE-SUSA-301 [acute pain following bunionectomy (NCT03108482)]. The primary efficacy outcome was sum of pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 h (SPID0-48).

Results: A total of 344 patients received CTC 200 mg BID, 342 received tramadol 50 or 100 mg four times a day, 181 received celecoxib 100 mg BID, and 172 received placebo. The least-squares mean difference in SPID0-48 was -21.8 (p = 0.002) for CTC versus tramadol and -72.8 (p < 0.001) for CTC versus placebo. A similar pattern of SPID0-48 was observed with CTC versus comparator whether patients had moderate or severe pain at baseline. Reduction in pain intensity was faster and reached mild intensity earlier with CTC versus comparators. Patients were significantly (p ≤ 0.005) less likely to receive rescue medication within 4 or 48 h with CTC compared with tramadol or placebo.

Conclusions: This pooled analysis reinforces the efficacy profile of CTC versus tramadol and, given that CTC permits lower daily tramadol dosing and thereby reduces unnecessary opioid use, this highlights its improved benefit/risk profile and its potential for the management of moderate-to-severe pain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Drugs in Research & Development
Drugs in Research & Development Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Drugs in R&D is an international, peer reviewed, open access, online only journal, and provides timely information from all phases of drug research and development that will inform clinical practice. Healthcare decision makers are thus provided with knowledge about the developing place of a drug in therapy. The Journal includes: Clinical research on new and established drugs; Preclinical research of direct relevance to clinical drug development; Short communications and case study reports that meet the above criteria will also be considered; Reviews may also be considered.
期刊最新文献
Acknowledgement to Referees. In-Use Physicochemical Stability of Sandoz Rituximab Biosimilar in 0.9% Sodium Chloride Solution After Prolonged Storage at Room Temperature Conditions. Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Rusfertide, a Hepcidin Mimetic, Following Subcutaneous Administration of a Lyophilized Powder Formulation in Healthy Volunteers. Bioequivalence Analysis of Ondansetron Hydrochloride Tablets in Healthy Chinese Subjects: A Randomized, Open-Label, Two-Period Crossover Phase I Study. Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Powders of Azithromycin for Suspension: A Nonblinded, Single-Dose, Randomized, Three-Way Crossover Study in Fed and Fasting States Among Healthy Chinese Volunteers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1