Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17943804›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Oral morphine for cancer pain.

P J Wiffen, H J McQuay

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04808531 (NanaBis™ an Oro-buccal Administered Equimolar d9-THC & CBD Formulation as Monotherapy for Management of Opioid Requiring Bone Pain Due to Metastatic Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04808531 phase3unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

NanaBis™ an Oro-buccal Administered Equimolar d9-THC & CBD Formulation as Monotherapy for Management of Opioid Requiring Bone Pain Due to Metastatic Cancer: Phase 3 Multi Centre Blinded Randomized Withdrawal Active & Placebo Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedlab ClinicalRan2023 to 2024Enrolled360ConditionsCancer Related PainArmsNanaBis™, Oxycodone CR, Placebo Spray, Placebo Tablet, Oxycodone IR
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Opioid therapy for treating rheumatoid arthritis pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Impact of opioid-induced constipation on healthcare resource utilization and costs for cancer pain patients receiving continuous opioid therapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Article
  8. Medication use during end-of-life care in a palliative care centre.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2015
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Bisphosphonate treatment may reduce osteoporosis risk in female cancer patients with morphine use: a population-based nested case-control study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P J WiffenChurchill Hospital, Pain Research Unit, Old Road, Headington, Oxford, UK, OX3 7LJ. phil.wiffen@pru.ox.ac.uk
H J McQuay
Churchill Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is an updated version of a previous Cochrane review first published in Issue 4, 2003 of The Cochrane Library. Morphine has been used for many years to relieve pain. Oral morphine in either immediate release or modified release form remains the analgesic of choice for moderate or severe cancer pain.

objectivesTo determine the efficacy of oral morphine in relieving cancer pain and to assess the incidence and severity of adverse effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following databases were searched: Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group Trials Register (December 2006); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006); and EMBASE (1974 to December 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the analgesic effect of oral morphine in adults and children with cancer pain. Any comparator trials were considered. Trials with fewer than ten participants were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author extracted data, which was checked by the other review author. There were insufficient comparable data for meta-analysis to be undertaken or to produce numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) for the analgesic effect. MAIN

resultsIn this update, nine new studies with 688 participants were added. Fifty-four studies (3749 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Fifteen studies compared oral modified release morphine (Mm/r) preparations with immediate release morphine (MIR). Twelve studies compared Mm/r in different strengths, five of these included 24-hour modified release products. Thirteen studies compared Mm/r with other opioids. Six studies compared MIR with other opioids. Two studies compared oral Mm/r with rectal Mm/r. Two studies compared MIR with MIR by a different route of administration. One study was found comparing each of the following: Mm/r tablet with Mm/r suspension; Mm/r with non-opioids; MIR with non-opioids; and oral morphine with epidural morphine. Morphine was shown to be an effective analgesic. Pain relief did not differ between Mm/r and MIR. Modified release versions of morphine were effective for 12 or 24-hour dosing depending on the formulation. Daily doses in studies ranged from 25 mg to 2000 mg with an average of between 100 mg and 250 mg. Dose titration were undertaken with both instant release and modified release products. Adverse effects were common but only 4% of patients discontinued treatment because of intolerable adverse effects. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe randomised trial literature for morphine is small given the importance of this medicine. Most trials recruited fewer than 100 participants and did not provide appropriate data for meta-analysis. Trial design was frequently based on titration of morphine or comparator to achieve adequate analgesia, then crossing participants over in crossover design studies. It was not clear if these trials are sufficiently powered to detect any clinical differences between formulations or comparator drugs. Studies added to the review reinforce the view that it is possible to use modified release morphine to titrate to analgesic effect. There is qualitative evidence for effectiveness of oral morphine which compares well to other available opioids. There is limited evidence to suggest that transmucosal fentanyl provides more rapid pain relief for breakthrough pain compared to morphine.

Indexed as

AdultAnalgesics, OpioidChildHumansMorphineNeoplasmsPainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesics, OpioidMorphine

Identifiers

PMID17943804
OpenAlexW1936569206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.