Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28657160›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017

Ketamine as an adjuvant to opioids for cancer pain.

Rae F Bell, Christopher Eccleston, Eija A Kalso

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03362073 (A Phase II Study About Efficacy and Safety of the Continuous IntraVenous Infusion of Ketamine in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients With Refractory Cancer Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT03362073 phase2unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

A Phase II Study About Efficacy and Safety of the Continuous IntraVenous Infusion of Ketamine in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients With Refractory Cancer Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorPusan National University Yangsan HospitalRan2018 to 2021Enrolled26ConditionsKetamine, Refractory Cancer PainArmsKetamine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 244 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Perioperative intravenous ketamine for acute postoperative pain in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic targets in lung cancer-nerve crosstalk.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Palliative Care and the Management of Common Distressing Symptoms in Advanced Cancer: Pain, Breathlessness, Nausea and Vomiting, and Fatigue.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Rae F BellRegional Centre of Excellence in Palliative Care, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Christopher Eccleston
Eija A Kalso
Haukeland University Hospital · NOHelsinki University Hospital · FIUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

Department of Health 13/89/29
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is an update of a review first published in 2003 and updated in 2012.Ketamine is a commonly used anaesthetic agent, and in subanaesthetic doses is also given as an adjuvant to opioids for the treatment of refractory cancer pain, when opioids alone or in combination with appropriate adjuvant analgesics prove to be ineffective. Ketamine is known to have psychomimetic (including hallucinogenic), urological, and hepatic adverse effects.

objectivesTo determine the effectiveness and adverse effects of ketamine as an adjuvant to opioids for refractory cancer pain in adults. SEARCH

methodsFor this update, we searched MEDLINE (OVID) to December 2016. We searched CENTRAL (CRSO), Embase (OVID) and two clinical trial registries to January 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: The intervention considered by this review was the addition of ketamine, given by any route of administration, in any dose, to pre-existing opioid treatment given by any route and in any dose, compared with placebo or active control. We included studies with a group size of at least 10 participants who completed the trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the search results and performed 'Risk of bias' assessments. We aimed to extract data on patient-reported pain intensity, total opioid consumption over the study period; use of rescue medication; adverse events; measures of patient satisfaction/preference; function; and distress. We also assessed participant withdrawal (dropout) from trial. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). MAIN

resultsOne new study (185 participants) was identified by the updated search and included in the review. We included a total of three studies in this update.Two small studies, both with cross-over design, with 20 and 10 participants respectively, were eligible for inclusion in the original review. One study with 20 participants examined the addition of intrathecal ketamine to intrathecal morphine, compared with intrathecal morphine alone. The second study with 10 participants examined the addition of intravenous ketamine bolus in two different doses to ongoing morphine therapy, compared with placebo. Both of these studies reported reduction in pain intensity and reduction in morphine requirements when ketamine was added to opioid for refractory cancer pain. The new study identified by the updated search had a parallel group design and 185 participants. This placebo-controlled study examined rapid titration of subcutaneous ketamine to high dose (500 mg) in participants who were using different opioids. There were no differences between groups for patient-reported pain intensity.Pooling of the data from the three included trials was not appropriate because of clinical heterogeneity.The study examining intrathecal drug administration reported no adverse events related to ketamine. In the study using intravenous bolus administration, ketamine caused hallucinations in four of 10 participants. In the rapid dose escalation/high-dose subcutaneous ketamine study, there was almost twice the incidence of adverse events in the ketamine group, compared to the placebo group, with the most common adverse events being needle site irritation and cognitive disturbance. Two serious adverse events (bradyarrhythmia and cardiac arrest) thought to be related to ketamine were also reported in this trial.For all three studies there was an unclear risk of bias overall. Using GRADE, we judged the quality of the evidence to be very low due to study limitations and imprecision due to the small number of participants in all comparisons. AUTHORS'

conclusionsCurrent evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of ketamine as an adjuvant to opioids for the relief of refractory cancer pain. The evidence was of very low quality, meaning that it does not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect, and the likelihood that the effect will be substantially different is high. Rapid dose escalation of ketamine to high dose (500 mg) does not appear to have clinical benefit and may be associated with serious adverse events. More randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining specific low-dose ketamine clinical regimens in current use are needed.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidCancer PainChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHallucinationsHumansKetamineMaleMiddle AgedMorphinePalliative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidKetamineMorphine

Identifiers

PMID28657160
PMCPMC6481583
OpenAlexW1707910413

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.