Wiffen Philip J, Derry Sheena, Moore R Andrew, McNicol Ewan D, Bell Rae F, Carr Daniel B, McIntyre Mairead, Wee Bee
Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LE.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 12;7(7):CD012637. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012637.pub2.
Pain is a common symptom with cancer, and 30% to 50% of all people with cancer will experience moderate to severe pain that can have a major negative impact on their quality of life. Non-opioid drugs are commonly used to treat mild to moderate cancer pain, and are recommended for this purpose in the WHO cancer pain treatment ladder, either alone or in combination with opioids.A previous Cochrane review that examined the evidence for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or paracetamol, alone or combined with opioids, for cancer pain was withdrawn in 2015 because it was out of date; the date of the last search was 2005. This review, and another on NSAIDs, updates the evidence.
To assess the efficacy of oral paracetamol (acetaminophen) for cancer pain in adults and children, and the adverse events reported during its use in clinical trials.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to March 2017, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, and two online study registries.
We included randomised, double-blind, studies of five days' duration or longer, comparing paracetamol alone with placebo, or paracetamol in combination with an opioid compared with the same dose of the opioid alone, for cancer pain of any intensity. Single-blind and open studies were also eligible for inclusion. The minimum study size was 25 participants per treatment arm at the initial randomisation.
Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality and potential bias. We did not carry out any pooled analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
Three studies in adults satisfied the inclusion criteria, lasting up to one week; 122 participants were randomised initially, and 95 completed treatment. We found no studies in children. One study was parallel-group, and two had a cross-over design. All used paracetamol as an add-on to established treatment with strong opioids (median daily morphine equivalent doses of 60 mg, 70 mg, and 225 mg, with some participants taking several hundred mg of oral morphine equivalents daily). Other non-paracetamol medication included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tricyclic antidepressants, or neuroleptics. All studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and small size; none was unequivocally at low risk of bias.None of the studies reported any of our primary outcomes: participants with pain reduction of at least 50%, and at least 30%, from baseline; participants with pain no worse than mild at the end of the treatment period; participants with Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) of much improved or very much improved (or equivalent wording). What pain reports there were indicated no difference between paracetamol and placebo when added to another treatment. There was no convincing evidence of paracetamol being different from placebo with regards to quality of life, use of rescue medication, or participant satisfaction or preference. Measures of harm (serious adverse events, other adverse events, and withdrawal due to lack of efficacy) were inconsistently reported and provided no clear evidence of difference.Our GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low for all outcomes, because studies were at high risk of bias from several sources.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no high-quality evidence to support or refute the use of paracetamol alone or in combination with opioids for the first two steps of the three-step WHO cancer pain ladder. It is not clear whether any additional analgesic benefit of paracetamol could be detected in the available studies, in view of the doses of opioids used.
疼痛是癌症的常见症状,30%至50%的癌症患者会经历中度至重度疼痛,这会对他们的生活质量产生重大负面影响。非阿片类药物常用于治疗轻度至中度癌症疼痛,并且在世卫组织癌症疼痛治疗阶梯中推荐用于此目的,可单独使用或与阿片类药物联合使用。先前一项考科蓝综述(Cochrane review)研究了非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)或对乙酰氨基酚单独或与阿片类药物联合用于癌症疼痛的证据,该综述于2015年撤回,因为其已过时;最后一次检索日期为2005年。本综述以及另一项关于NSAIDs的综述更新了相关证据。
评估口服对乙酰氨基酚(醋氨酚)对成人和儿童癌症疼痛的疗效,以及在临床试验中使用期间报告的不良事件。
我们检索了考科蓝对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE和Embase,检索时间从数据库创建至2017年3月,同时检索了检索到的论文和综述的参考文献列表,以及两个在线研究注册库。
我们纳入了为期五天或更长时间的随机、双盲研究,比较单独使用对乙酰氨基酚与安慰剂,或对乙酰氨基酚与阿片类药物联合使用与单独使用相同剂量阿片类药物,用于任何强度的癌症疼痛。单盲和开放研究也符合纳入条件。每个治疗组初始随机分组时的最小研究规模为25名参与者。
两位综述作者独立检索研究、提取疗效和不良事件数据,并检查研究质量和潜在偏倚问题。我们未进行任何汇总分析。我们使用GRADE评估证据质量并创建了“结果总结”表。
三项成人研究符合纳入标准,持续时间长达一周;最初有122名参与者被随机分组,95名完成治疗。我们未找到儿童研究。一项研究为平行组设计,两项为交叉设计。所有研究均将对乙酰氨基酚作为已确立的强效阿片类药物治疗(每日吗啡当量中位数剂量分别为60毫克、70毫克和225毫克,一些参与者每日口服吗啡当量达数百毫克)的附加用药。其他非对乙酰氨基酚药物包括非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)、三环类抗抑郁药或抗精神病药。所有研究因结局数据不完整和样本量小而存在高偏倚风险;无一研究明确处于低偏倚风险。没有一项研究报告了我们的任何主要结局:疼痛较基线减轻至少50%和至少30%的参与者;治疗期结束时疼痛不超过轻度的参与者;患者总体改善印象(PGIC)为明显改善或非常明显改善(或等效表述)的参与者。所报告的疼痛情况表明,添加到另一种治疗中的对乙酰氨基酚与安慰剂之间无差异。在生活质量、急救药物使用、参与者满意度或偏好方面,没有令人信服的证据表明对乙酰氨基酚与安慰剂不同。危害测量指标(严重不良事件、其他不良事件以及因缺乏疗效而退出)的报告不一致,未提供明显的差异证据。我们对所有结局的GRADE证据质量评估均为极低,因为研究存在多种来源的高偏倚风险。
没有高质量证据支持或反驳在世界卫生组织癌症疼痛三步阶梯的前两步中单独使用或与阿片类药物联合使用对乙酰氨基酚。鉴于所使用的阿片类药物剂量,在现有研究中是否能检测到对乙酰氨基酚的任何额外镇痛益处尚不清楚。