National Guideline Alliance, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, UK.
Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 9;6(6):CD003870. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003870.pub7.
Many people with cancer experience moderate to severe pain that requires treatment with strong opioids, such as oxycodone and morphine. Strong opioids are, however, not effective for pain in all people, neither are they well tolerated by all people. The aim of this review was to assess whether oxycodone is associated with better pain relief and tolerability than other analgesic options for adults with cancer pain. This is an updated Cochrane review previously published in 2017.
To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of oxycodone by any route of administration for pain in adults with cancer.
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (ISI Web of Science), BIOSIS (ISI), and PsycINFO (Ovid) to November 2021. We also searched four trial registries, checked the bibliographic references of relevant studies, and contacted the authors of the included studies. We applied no language, date, or publication status restrictions.
We included randomised controlled trials (parallel-group or cross-over) comparing oxycodone (any formulation or route of administration) with placebo or an active drug (including oxycodone) for cancer background pain in adults by examining pain intensity/relief, adverse events, quality of life, and participant preference.
Two review authors independently sifted the search, extracted data and assessed the included studies using standard Cochrane methodology. We meta-analysed pain intensity data using the generic inverse variance method, and pain relief and adverse events using the Mantel-Haenszel method, or summarised these data narratively along with the quality of life and participant preference data. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
For this update, we identified 19 new studies (1836 participants) for inclusion. In total, we included 42 studies which enrolled/randomised 4485 participants, with 3945 of these analysed for efficacy and 4176 for safety. The studies examined a number of different drug comparisons. Controlled-release (CR; typically taken every 12 hours) oxycodone versus immediate-release (IR; taken every 4-6 hours) oxycodone Pooled analysis of three of the four studies comparing CR oxycodone to IR oxycodone suggest that there is little to no difference between CR and IR oxycodone in pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.1 to 0.34; n = 319; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on adverse events, including constipation (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13), drowsiness/somnolence (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.54), nausea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.28), and vomiting (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.15) (very low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life or participant preference, however, three studies suggested that treatment acceptability may be similar between groups (low-certainty evidence). CR oxycodone versus CR morphine The majority of the 24 studies comparing CR oxycodone to CR morphine reported either pain intensity (continuous variable), pain relief (dichotomous variable), or both. Pooled analysis indicated that pain intensity may be lower (better) after treatment with CR morphine than CR oxycodone (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.27; n = 882 in 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). This SMD is equivalent to a difference of 0.27 points on the Brief Pain Inventory scale (0-10 numerical rating scale), which is not clinically significant. Pooled analyses also suggested that there may be little to no difference in the proportion of participants achieving complete or significant pain relief (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10; n = 1249 in 13 studies; low-certainty evidence). The RR for constipation (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86) may be lower after treatment with CR oxycodone than after CR morphine. Pooled analyses showed that, for most of the adverse events, the CIs were wide, including no effect as well as potential benefit and harm: drowsiness/somnolence (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05), nausea (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.12), and vomiting (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.04) (low or very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the treatment effects on treatment acceptability and participant preference. Other comparisons The remaining studies either compared oxycodone in various formulations or compared oxycodone to different alternative opioids. None found any clear superiority or inferiority of oxycodone for cancer pain, neither as an analgesic agent nor in terms of adverse event rates and treatment acceptability. The certainty of this evidence base was limited by the high or unclear risk of bias of the studies and by imprecision due to low or very low event rates or participant numbers for many outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions have not changed since the previous version of this review (in 2017). We found low-certainty evidence that there may be little to no difference in pain intensity, pain relief and adverse events between oxycodone and other strong opioids including morphine, commonly considered the gold standard strong opioid. Although we identified a benefit for pain relief in favour of CR morphine over CR oxycodone, this was not clinically significant and did not persist following sensitivity analysis and so we do not consider this important. However, we found that constipation and hallucinations occurred less often with CR oxycodone than with CR morphine; but the certainty of this evidence was either very low or the finding did not persist following sensitivity analysis, so these findings should be treated with utmost caution. Our conclusions are consistent with other reviews and suggest that, while the reliability of the evidence base is low, given the absence of important differences within this analysis, it seems unlikely that larger head-to-head studies of oxycodone versus morphine are justified, although well-designed trials comparing oxycodone to other strong analgesics may well be useful. For clinical purposes, oxycodone or morphine can be used as first-line oral opioids for relief of cancer pain in adults.
许多癌症患者经历中度至重度疼痛,需要使用强阿片类药物(如羟考酮和吗啡)进行治疗。然而,并非所有患者都对强阿片类药物有效,也并非所有患者都能耐受强阿片类药物。本综述的目的是评估羟考酮与其他镇痛选择相比,是否能更好地缓解癌症疼痛患者的疼痛和提高耐受性。这是一项之前于 2017 年发表的 Cochrane 综述的更新。
评估羟考酮通过任何途径给药治疗成人癌症疼痛的有效性和耐受性。
本次更新,我们检索了 Cochrane 图书馆中的 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE 和 MEDLINE In-Process(Ovid)、Embase(Ovid)、科学引文索引、会议论文集引文索引-科学(ISI Web of Science)、BIOSIS(ISI)和 PsycINFO(Ovid),检索时间截至 2021 年 11 月。我们还检索了四个试验注册库,检查了相关研究的参考文献,并联系了纳入研究的作者。我们没有对语言、日期或发表状态施加任何限制。
我们纳入了随机对照试验(平行组或交叉试验),比较了羟考酮(任何剂型或给药途径)与安慰剂或活性药物(包括羟考酮)在成人癌症背景疼痛方面的疗效,通过检查疼痛强度/缓解、不良反应、生活质量和参与者偏好来进行评估。
两名综述作者独立筛选了检索结果、提取了数据,并使用标准的 Cochrane 方法评估了纳入的研究。我们使用通用逆方差法对疼痛强度数据进行了荟萃分析,使用 Mantel-Haenszel 法对疼痛缓解和不良反应数据进行了荟萃分析,或者根据质量生活和参与者偏好数据进行了描述性总结。我们使用 GRADE 评估了证据的总体确定性。
本次更新,我们发现了 19 项新研究(1836 名参与者)纳入分析。总共纳入了 42 项研究,共纳入了 4485 名参与者,其中 3945 名参与者的疗效进行了分析,4176 名参与者的安全性进行了分析。这些研究检查了许多不同的药物比较。
控释(CR;通常每 12 小时服用一次)羟考酮与即释(IR;每 4-6 小时服用一次)羟考酮
对四项比较 CR 羟考酮与 IR 羟考酮的研究中的三项进行的荟萃分析表明,CR 羟考酮与 IR 羟考酮在疼痛强度方面差异很小(SMD 0.12,95%CI -0.1 至 0.34;n=319;低质量证据)。证据非常不确定不良反应的影响,包括便秘(RR 0.71,95%CI 0.45 至 1.13)、嗜睡/昏睡(RR 1.03,95%CI 0.69 至 1.54)、恶心(RR 0.85,95%CI 0.56 至 1.28)和呕吐(RR 0.66,95%CI 0.38 至 1.15)(低质量证据)。没有关于生活质量或参与者偏好的数据,但三项研究表明,两组之间的治疗接受度可能相似(低质量证据)。
CR 羟考酮与 CR 吗啡
比较 CR 羟考酮与 CR 吗啡的 24 项研究中的大多数报告了疼痛强度(连续变量)、疼痛缓解(二分类变量)或两者。荟萃分析表明,接受 CR 吗啡治疗的患者疼痛强度可能低于接受 CR 羟考酮治疗的患者(SMD 0.14,95%CI 0.01 至 0.27;n=7 项研究中的 882 名参与者;低质量证据)。这一 SMD 相当于 Brief Pain Inventory 量表(0-10 数字评分量表)上 0.27 分的差异,这并不具有临床意义。荟萃分析还表明,接受 CR 羟考酮治疗的患者完全或显著缓解疼痛的比例可能与接受 CR 吗啡治疗的患者相似(RR 1.02,95%CI 0.95 至 1.10;n=13 项研究中的 1249 名参与者;低质量证据)。与接受 CR 吗啡治疗的患者相比,接受 CR 羟考酮治疗的患者发生便秘的可能性可能较低(RR 0.75,95%CI 0.66 至 0.86)。荟萃分析显示,对于大多数不良反应,CI 较宽,包括无效应、潜在益处和危害:嗜睡/昏睡(RR 0.88,95%CI 0.74 至 1.05)、恶心(RR 0.93,95%CI 0.77 至 1.12)和呕吐(RR 0.81,95%CI 0.63 至 1.04)(低质量或极低质量证据)。没有关于生活质量的数据。关于治疗接受度和参与者偏好,证据对治疗效果的评估非常不确定。
其他比较
其余研究比较了羟考酮的不同剂型或比较了羟考酮与其他不同的阿片类药物。没有任何研究发现羟考酮在癌症疼痛方面具有明显的优势或劣势,无论是作为镇痛剂还是在不良反应发生率和治疗接受度方面。由于研究的偏倚风险高或不明确,以及许多结局的事件发生率或参与者数量低,导致证据基础的精确性有限,因此,该证据基础的结论没有改变。我们发现低质量证据表明,羟考酮与其他强阿片类药物(包括吗啡,通常被认为是强阿片类药物的金标准)在疼痛强度、疼痛缓解和不良反应方面可能没有差异。尽管我们发现 CR 吗啡在缓解疼痛方面优于 CR 羟考酮,但这并不具有临床意义,且在敏感性分析后没有持续存在,因此我们认为这并不重要。然而,我们发现 CR 羟考酮引起便秘和幻觉的情况比 CR 吗啡少;但该证据的确定性非常低,或者在敏感性分析后没有持续存在,因此这些发现应谨慎对待。我们的结论与其他综述一致,表明尽管证据基础的可靠性较低,但由于在本次分析中没有发现重要差异,因此不太可能有必要进行更大规模的羟考酮与吗啡头对头研究,尽管对比较羟考酮与其他强镇痛药的精心设计试验可能会很有用。在临床实践中,羟考酮或吗啡可以作为治疗成人癌症疼痛的一线口服阿片类药物。