Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Oct 31:7:17.
doi: 10.1186/1472-684X-7-17.

A randomized, double-blind comparison of OROS(R) hydromorphone and controlled-release morphine for the control of chronic cancer pain

Magdi Hanna  1 , John Thipphawong; 118 Study Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

A randomized, double-blind comparison of OROS(R) hydromorphone and controlled-release morphine for the control of chronic cancer pain

Magdi Hanna et al. BMC Palliat Care. .

Abstract

Background: Long-acting opioid formulations are advocated for maintaining pain control in chronic cancer pain. OROS(R) hydromorphone is a sustained-release formulation of hydromorphone that requires dosing once daily to maintain therapeutic concentrations. The objective of this study was to demonstrate the clinical equivalence of immediate-release and sustained-release formulations of hydromorphone and morphine for chronic cancer pain.

Methods: 200 patients with cancer pain (requiring </= 540 mg/d of oral morphine) participated in this double-blind, parallel-group trial. Patients were randomized to receive hydromorphone or morphine (immediate-release for 2-9 days, sustained-release for 10-15 days). Efficacy was assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), investigator and patient global evaluations, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and the Mini-Mental State Examination. The primary endpoint was the 'worst pain in the past 24 hours' item of the BPI, in both the immediate-release and sustained-release study phases, with treatments deemed equivalent if the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the between-group differences at endpoint were between -1.5 and 1.5. No equivalence limits were defined for secondary endpoints.

Results: Least-squares mean differences (95% CI) between groups were 0.2 (-0.4, 0.9) in the immediate-release phase and -0.8 (-1.6, -0.01) in the sustained-release phase (intent-to-treat population), indicating that the immediate-release formulations met the pre-specified equivalence criteria, but that the lower limit of the 95% CI (-1.6) was outside the boundary (-1.5) for the sustained-release formulations. BPI 'pain now PM' was significantly lower with OROS(R) hydromorphone compared with controlled-release morphine (least-squares mean difference [95% CI], -0.77 [-1.49, -0.05]; p = 0.0372). Scores for other secondary efficacy variables were similar between the two sustained-release treatments. At endpoint, > 70% of investigators and patients rated both treatments as good to excellent. The safety profiles of hydromorphone and morphine were similar and typical of opioid analgesics.

Conclusion: Equivalence was demonstrated for immediate-release formulations of hydromorphone and morphine, but not for the sustained-release formulations of OROS(R) hydromorphone and controlled-release morphine. The direction of the mean difference between the treatments (-0.8) and the out-of-range lower limit of the 95% CI (-1.6) were in favor of OROS(R) hydromorphone.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0041054.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00041054.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design. BID, twice daily; CR, controlled-release; IR, immediate-release; QD, once-daily; q4h, every 4 hours.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient disposition. IR, immediate-release; SR, sustained-release.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Least-squares mean differences and 95% confidence intervals between the OROS® hydromorphone and controlled-release (CR) morphine groups at end of the sustained-release (SR) phase.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mean Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference scores at baseline, end of immediate-release (IR) phase, and end of sustained-release (SR) phase. Values at baseline represent means; values at other time points represent least-squares means. At baseline: hydromorphone, n = 99; morphine, n = 101. In IR phase: IR hydromorphone, n = 99; IR morphine, n = 101. In SR phase: OROS® hydromorphone, n = 77; controlled-release (CR) morphine, n = 86.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Mean (standard error, SE) pain now scores in the morning during the sustained-release (SR) phase. Pain was rated using the 11-point Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). CR, controlled-release.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Mean (standard error, SE) pain now scores in the evening during the sustained-release (SR) phase. Pain was rated using the 11-point Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). CR, controlled-release.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Patient (A) and investigator (B) global evaluations of treatment effectiveness at the end of the sustained-release (SR) phase. CR, controlled-release.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schug SA, Zech D, Dorr U. Cancer pain management according to WHO analgesic guidelines. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1990;5:27–32. doi: 10.1016/S0885-3924(05)80006-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ventafridda V, Caraceni A, Gamba A. Field-testing of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain relief. Summary report of demonstration projects. In: Foley KM, Bonica JJ, Ventafridda V, editor. Advances in Pain Research and Therapy. New York: Raven Press, Ltd.; 1990. pp. 451–64.
    1. World Health Organization . Report of a WHO Expert Committee Technical Report Series 804. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1990. Cancer pain relief and palliative care; pp. 1–75.http://www.who.int/en/ - PubMed
    1. Hanks GW, Conno F, Cherny N, Hanna M, Kalso E, McQuay HJ, Mercadante S, Meynadier J, Poulain P, Ripamonti C, Radbruch L, Casas JR, Sawe J, Twycross RG, Ventafridda V. Morphine and alternative opioids in cancer pain: the EAPC recommendations. Br J Cancer. 2001;84:587–93. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1680. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. American Pain Society . Principles of Analgesic Use in the Treatment of Acute Pain and Cancer Pain. 5. Glenview, IL: American Pain Society; 2003. http://www.ampainsoc.org/pub/principles.htm

Associated data