Joanne Droney

Constipation in cancer patients on morphine

Goals of workConstipation is a significant problem in patients taking morphine for cancer pain. The aims of this study were (1) to assess the magnitude of constipation in this study cohort, (2) to analyse the constipation treatment strategies and (3) to look for evidence of inter-individual variation in both susceptibility to constipation and response to treatment with laxatives in this patient group.Materials and methodsThis was an observational study carried out in a tertiary referral cancer hospital. Two hundred seventy four patients were recruited to the study. All had a diagnosis of cancer and were on oral morphine for cancer pain. The main outcomes measured were subjective patient assessment of constipation severity in the preceding week and laxative use. Patients were asked to grade constipation in the preceding week on a four-point categorical scale: “not at all” (grade 0), “a little” (grade 1), “quite a bit” (grade 2) and “very much” (grade 3). Laxative dose groups (LDGs) were developed to assess laxative dosing.ResultsConstipation affects 72% of this cohort of patients. Constipation in this population is poorly managed. Eighty nine percent of constipated patients were on inadequate laxative therapy. Inter-individual variation in constipation on morphine exists: some patients do not experience constipation and do not need to take any laxatives, some patients do not experience constipation because they are taking laxatives and some patients experience constipation despite being on high dose laxatives. These three groups were compared in terms of cancer diagnosis, time on morphine, dose of morphine and other concomitant factors. No factor was identified to account for this inter-individual variation. Improvement in the clinical management of constipation is needed, with titration of laxatives according to individual patient need.ConclusionConstipation affects a large proportion of cancer patients taking oral morphine. Constipation in these patients is generally inadequately treated.

Differences between opioids: pharmacological, experimental, clinical and economical perspectives

Clinical studies comparing the response and side effects of various opioids have not been able to show robust differences between drugs. Hence, recommendations of the regulatory authorities have been driven by costs with a general tendency in many countries to restrict physicians use of opioids to morphine. Although this approach is recognized as cost‐effective in most cases there is solid evidence that, on an individual patient basis, opioids are not all equal. Therefore it is important to have an armamentarium of strong analgesics in clinical practice to ensure a personalized approach in patients who do not respond to standard treatment. In this review we highlight differences between opioids in human studies from a pharmacological, experimental, clinical and health economics point of view. We provide evidence that individuals respond differently to opioids, and that general differences between classes of opioids exist. We recommend that this recognition is used to individualize treatment in difficult cases allowing physicians to have a wide range of treatment options. In the end this will reduce pain and side effects, leading to improved quality of life for the patient and reduce the exploding pain related costs.

Differences between opioids

Clinical studies comparing the response and side effects of various opioids have not been able to show robust differences between drugs. Hence, recommendations of the regulatory authorities have been driven by costs with a general tendency in many countries to restrict physicians use of opioids to morphine. Although this approach is recognized as cost‐effective in most cases there is solid evidence that, on an individual patient basis, opioids are not all equal. Therefore it is important to have an armamentarium of strong analgesics in clinical practice to ensure a personalized approach in patients who do not respond to standard treatment. In this review we highlight differences between opioids in human studies from a pharmacological, experimental, clinical and health economics point of view. We provide evidence that individuals respond differently to opioids, and that general differences between classes of opioids exist. We recommend that this recognition is used to individualize treatment in difficult cases allowing physicians to have a wide range of treatment options. In the end this will reduce pain and side effects, leading to improved quality of life for the patient and reduce the exploding pain related costs.

Opioid genetics: the key to personalized pain control?

There are now several strong opioids available to choose from for the relief of moderate to severe pain. On a population level, there is no difference in terms of analgesic efficacy or adverse reactions between these drugs; however, on an individual level there is marked variation in response to a given opioid. The genetic influences to this variation are complex, and although current research has shown some promising results, these have not been replicated across larger studies and as such the ultimate aim of personalized prescribing remains elusive. If personalized prescribing could be achieved this would have a major impact at an individual level to facilitate safe, effective and rapid symptom control. This review presents some of the recent positive advances in opioid pharmacogenetic studies, focusing on associations between candidate genes and the three main elements of opioid response: analgesic, upper gastrointestinal and central adverse reactions.

Psychophysiological responses to pain identify reproducible human clusters

Summary Pain is a variable experience, yet the relative contributions of factors postulated to explain this effect remain unresolved. We address this knowledge gap by identifying 2 homogeneous reproducible human pain clusters. Abstract Pain is a ubiquitous yet highly variable experience. The psychophysiological and genetic factors responsible for this variability remain unresolved. We hypothesised the existence of distinct human pain clusters (PCs) composed of distinct psychophysiological and genetic profiles coupled with differences in the perception and the brain processing of pain. We studied 120 healthy subjects in whom the baseline personality and anxiety traits and the serotonin transporter‐linked polymorphic region (5‐HTTLPR) genotype were measured. Real‐time autonomic nervous system parameters and serum cortisol were measured at baseline and after standardised visceral and somatic pain stimuli. Brain processing reactions to visceral pain were studied in 29 subjects using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The reproducibility of the psychophysiological responses to pain was assessed at 1 year. In group analysis, visceral and somatic pain caused an expected increase in sympathetic and cortisol responses and activated the pain matrix according to fMRI studies. However, using cluster analysis, we found 2 reproducible PCs: at baseline, PC1 had higher neuroticism/anxiety scores (P ≥ 0.01); greater sympathetic tone (P < 0.05); and higher cortisol levels (P ≥ 0.001). During pain, less stimulus was tolerated (P ≥ 0.01), and there was an increase in parasympathetic tone (P ≥ 0.05). The 5‐HTTLPR short allele was over‐represented (P ≥ 0.005). PC2 had the converse profile at baseline and during pain. Brain activity differed (P ≥ 0.001); greater activity occurred in the left frontal cortex in PC1, whereas PC2 showed greater activity in the right medial/frontal cortex and right anterior insula. In health, 2 distinct reproducible PCs exist in humans. In the future, PC characterization may help to identify subjects at risk for developing chronic pain and may reduce variability in brain imaging studies.

Analgesia and central side-effects: two separate dimensions of morphine response

AIMS To present a statistical model for defining interindividual variation in response to morphine and to use this model in a preliminary hypothesis-generating multivariate genetic association study. METHODS Two hundred and sixty-four cancer patients taking oral morphine were included in a prospective observational study. Pain and morphine side-effect scores were examined using principal components analysis. The resulting principal components were used in an exploratory genetic association study of single nucleotide polymorphisms across the genes coding for the three opioid receptors, OPRM1, OPRK1 and OPRD1. Associations in multivariate models, including potential clinical confounders, were explored. RESULTS Two principal components corresponding to residual pain and central side-effects were identified. These components accounted for 42 and 18% of the variability in morphine response, respectively, were independent of each other and only mildly correlated. The genetic and clinical factors associated with these components were markedly different. Multivariate regression modelling, including clinical and genetic factors, accounted for only 12% of variability in residual pain on morphine and 3% of variability in central side-effects. CONCLUSIONS Although replication is required, this data-driven analysis suggests that pain and central side-effects on morphine may be two separate dimensions of morphine response. Larger study samples are necessary to investigate potential genetic and clinical associations comprehensively.

Gender, variation in opioid receptor genes and sensitivity to experimental pain

BackgroundPain tolerance is subject to considerable inter-individual variation, which may be influenced by a number of genetic and non-genetic factors. The mu, delta and kappa opioid receptors play a role in pain perception and are thought to mediate different pain modalities. The aim of this study was to explore associations between pain thresholds and gender and genetic variants in the three opioid receptor genes (OPRM, OPRD and OPRK). Experimental multi-modal pain data from previously published studies carried out in healthy Caucasian volunteers were used in order to limit the number of confounders to the study outcome. Data on thermal skin pain (n=36), muscle pressure pain (n=31) and mechanical visceral pain (n=50)) tolerance thresholds were included.ResultsNineteen genetic polymorphisms were included in linear regression modeling. Males were found to tolerate higher thermal and muscle pressure pain than females (p=0.003 and 0.02). Thirty four percent of variability in thermal skin pain was accounted for by a model consisting of OPRK rs6473799 and gender. This finding was just outside significance when correction for multiple testing was applied. Variability in muscle pressure pain tolerance was associated with OPRK rs7016778 and rs7824175. These SNPs accounted for 43% of variability in muscle pressure pain sensitivity and these findings remained significant after adjustment for multiple testing. No association was found with mechanical visceral pain.ConclusionThis is a preliminary and hypothesis generating study due to the relatively small study size. However, significant association between the opioid receptor genes and experimental pain sensitivity supports the influence of genetic variability in pain perception. These findings may be used to generate hypotheses for testing in larger clinical trials of patients with painful conditions.

Recent advances in the use of opioids for cancer pain.

Opioids are the mainstay of treatment for moderate to severe cancer pain. In recent years there have been many advances in the use of opioids for cancer pain. Availability and consumption of opioids have increased and opioids other than morphine (including methadone, fentanyl, oxycodone) have become more widely used. Inter-individual variation in response to opioids has been identified as a significant challenge in the management of cancer pain. Many studies have been published demonstrating the benefits of opioid switching as a clinical maneuver to improve tolerability. Constipation has been recognized as a significant burden in cancer patients on opioids. Peripherally restricted opioid antagonists have been developed for the prevention and management of opioid induced constipation. The phenomenon of breakthrough pain has been characterized and novel modes of opioid administration (transmucosal, intranasal, sublingual) have been explored to facilitate improved management of breakthrough cancer pain. Advances have also been made in the realm of molecular biology. Pharmacogenetic studies have explored associations between clinical response to opioids and genetic variation at a DNA level. To date these studies have been small but future research may facilitate prospective prediction of response to individual drugs.

Plasma Morphine and Metabolite Concentrations Are Associated With Clinical Effects of Morphine in Cancer Patients

CONTEXT Morphine is the opioid of choice for cancer-related pain, but for many patients the benefits of morphine are outweighed by its side effect profile. Morphine is metabolized to morphine-3-glucuronide and morphine-6-glucuronide; however, little is known about the contribution of these metabolites to analgesia and morphine-related side effects. OBJECTIVES We investigated the association between plasma morphine and metabolite concentrations and the clinical effects of morphine in cancer patients. METHODS A prospective study was performed in cancer patients taking oral morphine for moderate-to-severe cancer pain. Subjects who responded well to morphine (responders) and subjects who failed to respond to morphine because of lack of analgesia and/or the presence of intolerable side effects (nonresponders/switchers) were recruited. Pain and toxicity scores were recorded and blood samples were analyzed for plasma morphine, morphine-3-glucuronide, and morphine-6-glucuronide concentrations. RESULTS Results showed that 1) morphine responders have higher plasma morphine and metabolite concentrations compared with nonresponders, 2) lower pain scores are associated with higher plasma morphine and metabolite concentrations, 3) central side effects are associated with a higher metabolite:plasma morphine ratio, and 4) myoclonus is associated with extremely high concentrations of plasma morphine and metabolites. CONCLUSION This study has shown that plasma morphine and metabolite concentrations are associated with the clinical effects of morphine therapy. These results are important because they demonstrate the relevance of measuring plasma metabolite concentrations in clinical trials and the potential for metabolite data to deepen our understanding of factors that influence an individuals response to morphine.

Evolving Knowledge of Opioid Genetics in Cancer Pain

Inter-individual variation in response to opioids for cancer pain is a well-established phenomenon. Variation occurs in the dose of opioid required, the analgesic efficacy of the opioid and also in the side-effects experienced by the individual taking the drug. To date, no clinical factor has been identified that can reliably explain or predict such variation. In recent years there has been growing interest in the possibility that genetic factors may play a role in the variability in opioid response. The aims of this review are to present the evidence supporting pharmacogenetic research in this area, to evaluate some of the studies and results that have been published to date and to present some of the challenges for future research in this area.