Dataset Information

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a Medicinal Cannabis Formulation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain on Long-Term High Dose Opioid Analgesia: A Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This phase I open-label study examined pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of escalating doses of a novel combination cannabinoid medication (1:1 tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]/cannabidiol [CBD]) in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) on high dose opioid analgesia.

Methods

Nine people with CNCP and oral morphine equivalent daily dose of 60 mg or higher were recruited. Blood concentrations of THC, 11-hydroxytetrahydrocannabinol (OH-THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol (COOH-THC), and CBD were assayed weekly. Concentrations were measured after a single dose of 2.5 mg THC/2.5 mg CBD on day 1, and daily escalating doses up to a single dose of 12.5 mg THC/12.5 mg CBD on day 29. Follow-up was on day 36 after a 7-day washout. Secondary outcome data encompassed pain, mood, and sleep parameters.

Results

The parent compounds THC, and CBD, and metabolites OH-THC and COOH-THC were detected at most time points. In general, the concentration of all analytes increased until 2 h post-administration, decreasing to approximately pre-dose concentrations by 8 h. There was considerable inter- and intra-individual variability. The study medication was well tolerated. Eight participants reported at least one adverse event (AE), with a total of 62 AEs; most common were euphoric mood, headache, and agitation, none classified as severe. There was no significant change to pain severity self-ratings, nor use of pain medications. Improvements in pain interference scores, mood, and some sleep parameters were observed.

Conclusion

The THC/CBD formulation was tolerated well in a group of patients with CNCP. Between-participant variability supports personalized dosing and "start low-go slow" titration. To validate and quantify improvements in secondary efficacy outcomes a randomized placebo-controlled study is needed.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (CT-2019-CTN-01224-1).

SUBMITTER: Bonomo Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8861237 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a Medicinal Cannabis Formulation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain on Long-Term High Dose Opioid Analgesia: A Pilot Study.

Bonomo Yvonne Y Norman Amanda A Collins Lisa L O'Neill Helen H Galettis Peter P Trinca Jane J Strauss Nigel N Martin Jennifer J Castle David D

Pain and therapy 20211218 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>This phase I open-label study examined pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of escalating doses of a novel combination cannabinoid medication (1:1 tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]/cannabidiol [CBD]) in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) on high dose opioid analgesia.<h4>Methods</h4>Nine people with CNCP and oral morphine equivalent daily dose of 60 mg or higher were recruited. Blood concentrations of THC, 11-hydroxytetrahydrocannabinol (OH-THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-te ...[more]

PMID: 34921662

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief.Search methodsWe ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles.Selection criteriaWe selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events.Main resultsForty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay.Authors' conclusionsSince the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Project description:A dry-powder inhaled formulation of treprostinil (LIQ861) produced using PRINT® technology offers a substantial advantage over current nebulized therapy. Treprostinil is a synthetic prostacyclin analogue that is currently approved for inhalation administration to patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension via nebulized Tyvaso® inhalation solution. LTI-101 was a phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, single-center study that evaluated the ascending single-dose pharmacokinetics of LIQ861 in healthy subjects. Six sequential, escalating doses (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, and 150 mcg) were studied to investigate treprostinil exposure from LIQ861 inhalation. Subjects (n = 57) were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive a single dose of either LIQ861 (n = 43) or placebo (n = 14); 56 subjects completed all protocol-defined assessments. Following single-dose administration, treprostinil exposure from LIQ861 increased proportionally across the dose range studied, and the pharmacokinetics profile of treprostinil administered as LIQ861 was similar to prior reports of inhaled treprostinil. All doses of LIQ861 were generally well-tolerated with no deaths, serious adverse events, or dose-limiting toxicities. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events related to study drug administration were coughing and throat irritation, which are common to dry-powder formulations. Treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were reported more frequently at higher dose levels; however, all were assessed as mild in severity. We conclude that the pharmacokinetics profile of treprostinil using a dry-powder inhaled formulation increased in proportion to dose as anticipated and was similar to earlier reports of inhaled, nebulized treprostinil (Tyvaso®). Based on these results, a phase 3 study (INSPIRE; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT03399604) evaluating the long-term safety and tolerability of LIQ861 in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension was initiated.

Project description:ImportanceThe overprescription of opioids to surgical patients is recognized as an important factor contributing to the opioid crisis. However, the value of prescribing opioid analgesia (OA) vs opioid-free analgesia (OFA) after postoperative discharge remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) to assess the comparative effectiveness of OA vs OFA after outpatient general surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis parallel, 2-group, assessor-blind, pragmatic pilot RCT was conducted from January 29 to September 3, 2020 (last follow-up on October 2, 2020). at 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing outpatient abdominal (ie, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or hernia repair) or breast (ie, partial or total mastectomy) general surgical procedures. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to drugs used in the trial, preoperative opioid use, conditions that could affect assessment of outcomes, and intraoperative or early complications requiring hospitalization.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive OA (around-the-clock nonopioids and opioids for breakthrough pain) or OFA (around-the-clock nonopioids with increasing doses and/or addition of nonopioid medications for breakthrough pain) after postoperative discharge.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes were a priori RCT feasibility criteria (ie, rates of surgeon agreement, patient eligibility, patient consent, treatment adherence, loss to follow-up, and missing follow-up data). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and interference, analgesic intake, 30-day unplanned health care use, and adverse events. Between-group comparison of outcomes followed the intention-to-treat principle.ResultsA total of 15 surgeons were approached; all (100%; 95% CI, 78%-100%) agreed to have patients recruited and adhered to the study procedures. Rates of patient eligibility and consent were 73% (95% CI, 66%-78%) and 57% (95% CI, 49%-65%), respectively. Seventy-six patients were randomized (39 [51%] to OA and 37 [49%] to OFA) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 55.5 [14.5] years; 50 [66%] female); 40 (53%) underwent abdominal surgery, and 36 (47%) underwent breast surgery. Seventy-five patients (99%; 95% CI, 93%-100%) adhered to the allocated treatment; 1 patient randomly assigned to OFA received an opioid prescription. Seventeen patients (44%) randomly assigned to OA consumed opioids after discharge. Seventy-three patients (96%; 95% CI, 89%-99%) completed the 30-day follow-up. The rate of missing questionnaires was 37 of 3724 (1%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.4%). All the a priori RCT feasibility criteria were fulfilled.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this pilot RCT support the feasibility of conducting a robust, full-scale RCT to inform evidence-based prescribing of analgesia after outpatient general surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04254679.

Project description:Medicinal cannabis registries typically report pain as the most common reason for use. It would be clinically useful to identify patterns of cannabis treatment in migraine and headache, as compared to arthritis and chronic pain, and to analyze preferred cannabis strains, biochemical profiles, and prescription medication substitutions with cannabis.Via electronic survey in medicinal cannabis patients with headache, arthritis, and chronic pain, demographics and patterns of cannabis use including methods, frequency, quantity, preferred strains, cannabinoid and terpene profiles, and prescription substitutions were recorded. Cannabis use for migraine among headache patients was assessed via the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, a validated screen used to predict the probability of migraine.Of 2032 patients, 21 illnesses were treated with cannabis. Pain syndromes accounted for 42.4% (n =?861) overall; chronic pain 29.4% (n =?598;), arthritis 9.3% (n =?188), and headache 3.7% (n =?75;). Across all 21 illnesses, headache was a symptom treated with cannabis in 24.9% (n =?505). These patients were given the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, with 68% (n =?343) giving 3 "Yes" responses, 20% (n =?102) giving 2 "Yes" responses (97% and 93% probability of migraine, respectively). Therefore, 88% (n =?445) of headache patients were treating probable migraine with cannabis. Hybrid strains were most preferred across all pain subtypes, with "OG Shark" the most preferred strain in the ID Migraine™ and headache groups. Many pain patients substituted prescription medications with cannabis (41.2-59.5%), most commonly opiates/opioids (40.5-72.8%). Prescription substitution in headache patients included opiates/opioids (43.4%), anti-depressant/anti-anxiety (39%), NSAIDs (21%), triptans (8.1%), anti-convulsants (7.7%), muscle relaxers (7%), ergots (0.4%).Chronic pain was the most common reason for cannabis use, consistent with most registries. The majority of headache patients treating with cannabis were positive for migraine. Hybrid strains were preferred in ID Migraine™, headache, and most pain groups, with "OG Shark", a high THC (?9-tetrahydrocannabinol)/THCA (tetrahydrocannabinolic acid), low CBD (cannabidiol)/CBDA (cannabidiolic acid), strain with predominant terpenes ?-caryophyllene and ?-myrcene, most preferred in the headache and ID Migraine™ groups. This could reflect the potent analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-emetic properties of THC, with anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties of ?-caryophyllene and ?-myrcene. Opiates/opioids were most commonly substituted with cannabis. Prospective studies are needed, but results may provide early insight into optimizing crossbred cannabis strains, synergistic biochemical profiles, dosing, and patterns of use in the treatment of headache, migraine, and chronic pain syndromes.

Dataset Information

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a Medicinal Cannabis Formulation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain on Long-Term High Dose Opioid Analgesia: A Pilot Study.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a Medicinal Cannabis Formulation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain on Long-Term High Dose Opioid Analgesia: A Pilot Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets