22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Co-crystal of Tramadol–Celecoxib in Patients with Moderate to Severe Acute Post-surgical Oral Pain: A Dose-Finding, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Active-Controlled, Multicentre, Phase II Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Co-crystal of tramadol–celecoxib (CTC), containing equimolar quantities of the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) tramadol and celecoxib (100 mg CTC = 44 mg rac–tramadol hydrochloride and 56 mg celecoxib), is a novel API-API co-crystal for the treatment of pain. We aimed to establish the effective dose of CTC for treating acute pain following oral surgery.

          Methods

          A dose-finding, double-blind, randomised, placebo- and active-controlled, multicentre (nine Spanish hospitals), phase II study (EudraCT number: 2011-002778-21) was performed in male and female patients aged ≥ 18 years experiencing moderate to severe pain following extraction of two or more impacted third molars requiring bone removal. Eligible patients were randomised via a computer-generated list to receive one of six single-dose treatments (CTC 50, 100, 150, 200 mg; tramadol 100 mg; and placebo). The primary efficacy endpoint was the sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) over 8 h assessed in the per-protocol population.

          Results

          Between 10 February 2012 and 13 February 2013, 334 patients were randomised and received study treatment: 50 mg ( n = 55), 100 mg ( n = 53), 150 mg ( n = 57), or 200 mg ( n = 57) of CTC, 100 mg tramadol ( n = 58), or placebo ( n = 54). CTC 100, 150, and 200 mg showed significantly higher efficacy compared with placebo and/or tramadol in all measures: SPID (0–8 h) (mean [standard deviation]): − 90 (234), − 139 (227), − 173 (224), 71 (213), and 22 (228), respectively. The proportion of patients experiencing treatment-emergent adverse events was lower in the 50 (12.7% [ n = 7]), 100 (11.3% [ n = 6]), and 150 (15.8% [ n = 9]) mg CTC groups, and similar in the 200 mg (29.8% [ n = 17]) CTC group, compared with the tramadol group (29.3% [ n = 17]), with nausea, dizziness, and vomiting the most frequent events.

          Conclusion

          Significant improvement in the benefit–risk ratio was observed for CTC (doses ≥ 100 mg) over tramadol and placebo in the treatment of acute pain following oral surgery.

          Funding

          Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve, S.A.U.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Treatment of acute postoperative pain.

          Although postoperative pain remains incompletely controlled in some settings, increased understanding of its mechanisms and the development of several therapeutic approaches have substantially improved pain control in past years. Advances in our understanding of the process of nociception have led to insight into gene-based pain therapy, the development of acute opioid-induced hyperalgesia, and persistent postsurgical pain. Use of specific analgesic techniques such as regional analgesia could improve patient outcomes. We also examine the development of new analgesic agents and treatment modalities and regimens for acute postoperative pain. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Clinical Pharmacology of Tramadol

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The prevalence of postoperative pain in a sample of 1490 surgical inpatients.

              To measure the prevalence of postoperative pain, an assessment was made of 1490 surgical inpatients who were receiving postoperative pain treatment according to an acute pain protocol. Measurements of pain (scores from 0 to 100 on a visual analogue scale) were obtained three times a day on the day before surgery and on days 0-4 postoperatively; mean pain intensity scores were calculated. Patients were classified as having no pain (score 0-5), mild pain (score 6-40), moderate pain (score 41-74) or severe pain (score 75-100). Moderate or severe pain was reported by 41% of the patients on day 0, 30% on days 1 and 19%, 16% and 14% on days 2, 3 and 4. The prevalence of moderate or severe pain in the abdominal surgery group was high on postoperative days 0-1 (30-55%). A high prevalence of moderate or severe pain was found during the whole of days 1-4 in the extremity surgery group (20-71%) and in the back/spinal surgery group (30-64%). We conclude that despite an acute pain protocol, postoperative pain treatment was unsatisfactory, especially after intermediate and major surgical procedures on an extremity or on the spine.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +34 93 446 6000 , svidelaces@gmail.com , svidela@bellvitgehospital.cat
                Journal
                Drugs R D
                Drugs R D
                Drugs in R&D
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                1174-5886
                1179-6901
                25 May 2018
                25 May 2018
                June 2018
                : 18
                : 2
                : 137-148
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1771 0279, GRID grid.411066.4, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, , Complexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña, ; A Coruña, Spain
                [2 ]Clinical Investigation Department, Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve, S.A.U., Av Mare de Déu de Montserrat 221, 08041 Barcelona, Spain
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8970 9163, GRID grid.81821.32, Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, , Hospital Universitario La Paz, ; Madrid, Spain
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8836 0780, GRID grid.411129.e, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, , Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, ; Barcelona, Spain
                [5 ]Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Hospital Plató, Barcelona, Spain
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0671 5785, GRID grid.411068.a, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, , Hospital Clínico San Carlos, ; Madrid, Spain
                [7 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8569 3993, GRID grid.414740.2, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, , Hospital General de Granollers, ; Granollers, Spain
                [8 ]GRID grid.411308.f, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, , Hospital Clínico de Valencia, ; Valencia, Spain
                [9 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1767 647X, GRID grid.411251.2, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, , Hospital Universitario La Princesa, ; Madrid, Spain
                [10 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0675 8654, GRID grid.411083.f, Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, , Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, ; Barcelona, Spain
                [11 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0427 2257, GRID grid.418284.3, Present Address: Clinical Research Support Unit, Clinical Pharmacology Department, , Bellvitge University Hospital/IDIBELL, ; Barcelona, Spain
                Article
                235
                10.1007/s40268-018-0235-y
                5995791
                29799099
                8f8f80f0-47ff-42cf-81da-1ad1e93b98c0
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

                Comments

                Comment on this article