Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25503691›Full record

SynthesisSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2015

[Long-term opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in open-label extension trials with study duration of at least 26 weeks].

W Häuser, K Bernardy, C Maier

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Taking the pain out of pain.British journal of pain · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Non-Specific Low Back Pain.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Oxycodone for pain in fibromyalgia in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. [Opioids for noncancer pain in the elderly].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2015
    Article
  19. Pain, analgesics, and safety in patients with CKD.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

W HäuserInnere Medizin I, Klinikum Saarbrücken gGmbH, Winterberg 1, 66119, Saarbrücken, Deutschland, whaeuser@klinikum-saarbruecken.de.
K Bernardy
C Maier

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe efficacy and safety of long-term (≥ 6 months) opioid therapy (LtOT) in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is under debate. A systematic review with meta-analysis of the efficacy and harms of opioids in open-label extension studies of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has not been conducted until now.

methodsWe screened MEDLINE and clinicaltrials.gov (through to December 2013), as well as reference sections of systematic reviews of long-term RCTs of opioids in CNCP. We included open-label extension trials with a study duration ≥ 26 weeks of RCTs of ≥ 2 weeks duration. Using a random effects model, pooled estimates of event rates for categorical data and standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables were calculated.

resultsWe included 11 open-label extension studies with 2445 participants with nociceptive (low back, osteoarthritis) and neuropathic (radicular, polyneuropathy) pain. Median study duration was 26 (range 26-108) weeks. Four studies tested oxycodone, two studies tramadol and buprenorphine; hydromorphone, morphine, oxymorphone and tapentadol were each tested in one study. Of the patients randomized at baseline, 28.5 % (95 % confidence interval, CI, 17.9-39.2 %) finished the open-label period; 53.5 % (95 % CI 38.1-68.2 %) of patients entering the open-label period finished the open-label period. In sum, the total loss was 71.5 % (95 % CI 60.9-83.1 %) of all patients primarily included into the RCT. A total of 4.9 % (95 % CI 2.9-8.2 %) of patients dropped out due lack of efficacy; 16.8 % (95 % CI 11.0-24.8 %) dropped out to due adverse events (AE) in the open-label period and 0.08 % (95 % CI 0.001-0.05 %) of patients died during the open-label period. Only one study systematically assessed aberrant drug behavior of the patients: 5.7 % (95 % CI 3.4-9.6 %) showed aberrant drug behavior in the opinion of the investigators and 2.6 % (95 % CI 1.2-5.8 %) were judged to show aberrant drug behavior by independent expert assessment. There was no significant change (p = 0.50) in pain intensity between the end of the randomized period and the end of open-label phase (SMD 0.19 [- 0.03, 0.41]; six studies with 1360 participants).

conclusionOnly a minority of patients selected for opioid therapy at randomization finished the long-term open-label study. However, sustained effects of pain reduction could be demonstrated in these patients. LtOT can be considered in carefully selected and monitored CNCP patients who experience clinically meaningful pain reduction with at least tolerable AE in short-term opioid therapy. The English full-text version of this article is freely available at SpringerLink (under "Supplementary Material").

Indexed as

Long-Term CareAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineChronic PainHydromorphoneMorphineOxycodoneOxymorphonePain MeasurementPhenolsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTapentadolTramadolTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineHydromorphoneMorphineOxycodoneOxymorphonePhenolsTapentadolTramadol

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.