The Adverse Events of Oxycodone in Cancer-Related Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

The adverse events (AEs) of oxycodone in cancer-related pain were controversial, so we conducted a meta-analysis to determine it. PubMed, Embase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang database, The Cochrane library, Web of Science, and the reference of included studies were searched to recognize pertinent studies. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all AEs were all extracted. The fixed-effects model was used to calculate pooled RRs and 95% CIs. Power calculation was performed using macro embedded in SAS software after all syntheses were completed. We identified 11 eligible trials involving 1211 patients: 604 patients included in oxycodone group and 607 patients involved in control group. Our quantitative analysis included 8 AEs, and the pooled analyses indicated that oxycodone compared with other opioids in cancer-related pain were not significantly decreased RRs of all AEs (dizziness RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.69-1.30, Z = 0.35, P = 0.72; nausea RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.72-1.07, Z = 1.26, P = 0.21; vomiting RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.15, Z = 0.9, P = 0.37; sleepiness RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.38-1.36, Z = 0.36, P = 0.72; constipation RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.81-1.19, Z = 0.21, P = 0.83; anorexia RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.58-1.62, Z = 0.11, P = 0.91; pruritus RR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.44-1.30, Z = 1.01, P = 0.31; dysuria RR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.07-1.62, Z = 1.36, P = 0.1)]. The subgroup analysis shown that Ox controlled-release (CR) had less sleepiness compared with MS-contin (Mc) CR (RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.90, P = 0.02). The power analysis suggests that all AEs have low statistical power. The present meta-analysis detected that no statistically significant difference were found among oxycodone and other opioids in all AEs, but Ox CR may had less sleepiness compared with Mc CR when subgroup analysis were conducted.

FIGURE 1

Flow diagram of the details of the study.

FIGURE 2

Appraisal of risk of bias of the included trials using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Low risk = bias, if present, is unlikely to alter the results seriously, unclear risk = bias raises some doubt about the results, high risk = bias may alter the results seriously.

FIGURE 3

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of dizziness.

FIGURE 4

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of nausea.

FIGURE 5

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of vomiting.

FIGURE 6

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of sleepiness.

FIGURE 7

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of constipation.

FIGURE 8

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of anorexia.

FIGURE 9

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of pruritus.

FIGURE 10

Meta-analysis result of the relative risk of dysuria.