Opioids for cancer-related pain in children and adolescents

The Challenge of Managing Neuropathic Pain in Children and Adolescents with Cancer

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a common complication associated with some types of childhood cancer, mainly due to nerve compression, chronic post-surgical pain, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. NP is usually less responsive to traditional analgesics, and there is generally a lack of evidence on its management in cancer patients, leading to recommendations often based on clinical trials conducted on other forms of non-malignant NP. In pediatric oncology, managing NP is still very challenging for physicians. Different factors contribute to increasing the risk of undertreatment: (a) children may be unable to describe the quality of pain; therefore, the risk for NP to be underestimated or remain unrecognized; (b) specific tools to diagnose NP have not been validated in children; (c) there is a lack of randomized clinical trials involving children, with most evidence being based on case series and case reports; (d) most drugs used for adult patients are not approved for childhood cancers, and drug regulation varies among different countries; (e) recommendations for pediatric pain treatment are still not available. In this paper, a multidisciplinary team will review the current literature regarding children with cancer-related NP to define the best possible diagnostic strategies (e.g., clinical and instrumental tests) and propose a therapeutic care pathway, including both non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches, which could help pediatricians, oncologists, neurologists, and pain therapists in designing the most effective multidisciplinary approach.

Piperine attenuates cancer-associated pain induced by microglial activation via increasing miR-150-50p

AIM

Severe painful neuropathy often occurs in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that microglia contribute to the occurrence and development of cancer-associated pain. This study aimed to investigate the mechanisms by which piperine influences cancer-associated pain induced by microglia activation.

METHODS

The tumor cell implantation (TCI) model was adopted as the cancer-associated pain model in mice. Behavioral tests were done to confirm that model mice were sensitive to acute mechanical and thermal pain. Western blot (WB) and immunofluorescence (IF) were conducted to quantify expression level of microglia marker protein Iba1 in mice spinal cord tissues. The expression of miR-150-5p and CXCL12 in the mice spinal cord was evaluated by Quantitative real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Primary microglia from mice were treated with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) to investigate neuroinflammation.

RESULTS

The modeled mice showed high susceptibility to acute mechanical hyperalgesia and thermal hyperalgesia. The expression of microglia marker protein Iba1 in the model group was increased in vitro and in vivo. Treatment with piperine effectively relieved the cancer-associated pain in mice. The results of FISH and qRT-PCR showed that piperine significantly increased the expression of miR-150-5p and reduced the expression of CXCL12 in the spinal cord of mice. Furthermore, it inhibited the microglia-induced cancer-associated pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Piperine upregulates miR-150-50p levels, inhibits CXCL12 expression, and reduces microglia levels at the lesion site. Therefore, piperine may be a potential drug candidate for the treatment of cancer-associated pain.

Automation of duplicate record detection for systematic reviews: Deduplicator

BACKGROUND

To describe the algorithm and investigate the efficacy of a novel systematic review automation tool "the Deduplicator" to remove duplicate records from a multi-database systematic review search.

METHODS

We constructed and tested the efficacy of the Deduplicator tool by using 10 previous Cochrane systematic review search results to compare the Deduplicator's 'balanced' algorithm to a semi-manual EndNote method. Two researchers each performed deduplication on the 10 libraries of search results. For five of those libraries, one researcher used the Deduplicator, while the other performed semi-manual deduplication with EndNote. They then switched methods for the remaining five libraries. In addition to this analysis, comparison between the three different Deduplicator algorithms ('balanced', 'focused' and 'relaxed') was performed on two datasets of previously deduplicated search results.

RESULTS

Before deduplication, the mean library size for the 10 systematic reviews was 1962 records. When using the Deduplicator, the mean time to deduplicate was 5 min per 1000 records compared to 15 min with EndNote. The mean error rate with Deduplicator was 1.8 errors per 1000 records in comparison to 3.1 with EndNote. Evaluation of the different Deduplicator algorithms found that the 'balanced' algorithm had the highest mean F1 score of 0.9647. The 'focused' algorithm had the highest mean accuracy of 0.9798 and the highest recall of 0.9757. The 'relaxed' algorithm had the highest mean precision of 0.9896.

CONCLUSIONS

This demonstrates that using the Deduplicator for duplicate record detection reduces the time taken to deduplicate, while maintaining or improving accuracy compared to using a semi-manual EndNote method. However, further research should be performed comparing more deduplication methods to establish relative performance of the Deduplicator against other deduplication methods.

A Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline: a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations for symptom treatment

BACKGROUND

Children with life-threatening and life-limiting conditions can experience high levels of suffering due to multiple distressing symptoms that result in poor quality of life and increase risk of long-term distress in their family members. High quality symptom treatment is needed for all these children and their families, even more so at the end-of-life. In this paper, we provide evidence-based recommendations for symptom treatment in paediatric palliative patients to optimize care.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel of 56 experts in paediatric palliative care and nine (bereaved) parents was established to develop recommendations on symptom treatment in paediatric palliative care including anxiety and depression, delirium, dyspnoea, haematological symptoms, coughing, skin complaints, nausea and vomiting, neurological symptoms, pain, death rattle, fatigue, paediatric palliative sedation and forgoing hydration and nutrition. Recommendations were based on evidence from a systematic literature search, additional literature sources (such as guidelines), clinical expertise, and patient and family values. We used the GRADE methodology for appraisal of evidence. Parents were included in the guideline panel to ensure the representation of patient and family values.

RESULTS

We included a total of 18 studies that reported on the effects of specific (non) pharmacological interventions to treat symptoms in paediatric palliative care. A few of these interventions showed significant improvement in symptom relief. This evidence could only (partly) answer eight out of 27 clinical questions. We included 29 guidelines and two textbooks as additional literature to deal with lack of evidence. In total, we formulated 221 recommendations on symptom treatment in paediatric palliative care based on evidence, additional literature, clinical expertise, and patient and family values.

CONCLUSION

Even though available evidence on symptom-related paediatric palliative care interventions has increased, there still is a paucity of evidence in paediatric palliative care. We urge for international multidisciplinary multi-institutional collaboration to perform high-quality research and contribute to the optimization of symptom relief in palliative care for all children worldwide.

Methadone for Cancer Pain Management in Children: A Review of Literature

Pain associated with cancer is a common feature among children and adolescents. Among opioids, methadone is a unique drug for its multiple mechanisms of action. Methadone is currently underutilized in children. The use of methadone for cancer pain management in children was assessed in a systematic review. Altogether, 141 children receiving methadone were examined, and another 126 children were assessed for QT prolongation. In the clinical studies, modalities of use, dosing, and duration of assessment were highly variable. In general, methadone was effective and well tolerated with a limited tendency for dose increases. QT prolongation was reported in a percentage of patients independently of the dosages or other variables. The majority of studies considered the use of methadone to be safe and effective in children. Despite methadone possessing interesting properties that make this drug unique in a pediatric context, data is limited, and the literature available is based on retrospective studies. Methadone could be an effective, inexpensive, and versatile medication in children with cancer who have pain. This drug deserves more interest and should prompt studies of better quality with a larger number of patients.

Multimodal Analgesia in Pediatric Cancer Pain Management: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

Objectives A multimodal approach to pain management, including potential interventional techniques, is suggested to achieve adequate pain control. This study discusses the techniques and medications employed to manage pain in pediatric oncology patients. Methodology This study included 90 patients under 18 years of age who underwent pain management in the algology clinic between 2002 and 2020. From the algology follow-up records, the following data were recorded: demographic information, follow-up time, cancer diagnosis and stage, cause and location of pain, systems involved, duration and intensity of pain, analgesic and adjuvant drugs prescribed, routes and duration of drug administration, complications, interventional procedures if performed, "pain intensity" scores prior to and following treatment, and daily and total analgesic consumption of the patients. Results The mean age was 11.4±4.1 years (min-max: 2-17). Leukemia and lymphoma were the most frequently diagnosed (30%). Of the 31 features identified in the staging, 27 (87.1%) were stage 4 at admission. The causes of pain in children were neoplasms in 81.2% (n = 73). At admission, 72.3% (n = 65) had severe pain for at least a month. It was determined that 90% (n = 81) of the patients were using opioids and 28.9% (n = 26) were using dual opioids. The mean tramadol dose was 129.0±97.9 mg/day (12-380 mg/day), and the mean morphine dose was 14.8±11.3 mg/day (1-52 mg/day). The mean transdermal fentanyl dose was 33.2±21.6 µgr/h (12-75 µgr/h). Adjuvant therapy was administered in 25.6% (n = 24) of the patients. Epidural catheterization was performed on 6.6% (n = 6) of the patients. The mean initial pain scores were 5.2±1.7, which decreased to 1.5±0.7 with a significant difference (p < 0.001). In the study, 93% (n = 84) of the patients had no pain management complications noted. Conclusions The pain level that pediatric cancer patients endure critically influences their and their family's quality of life. The fact that opioid-related adverse effects associated with pediatric pain management occur far less frequently than previously thought may help prevent opiophobia. Effective and safe analgesia can be provided with multimodal analgesia to manage pediatric cancer pain.

Ion channels in cancer-induced bone pain: from molecular mechanisms to clinical applications

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) caused by bone metastasis is one of the most prevalent diseases, and current treatments rely primarily on opioids, which have significant side effects. However, recent developments in pharmaceutical science have identified several new mechanisms for CIBP, including the targeted modification of certain ion channels and receptors. Ion channels are transmembrane proteins, which are situated on biological cell membranes, which facilitate passive transport of inorganic ions across membranes. They are involved in various physiological processes, including transmission of pain signals in the nervous system. In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the role of ion channels in chronic pain, including CIBP. Therefore, in this review, we summarize the current literature on ion channels, related receptors, and drugs and explore the mechanism of CIBP. Targeting ion channels and regulating their activity might be key to treating pain associated with bone cancer and offer new treatment avenues.

Pain management in pediatric age. An update

Differently from the adult patients, in paediatric age it is more difficult to assess and treat efficaciously the pain and often this symptom is undertreated or not treated. In children, a selection of appropriate pain assessment tools should consider the age, the cognitive level, the presence of eventual disability, the type of pain and the situation in which it is occurring. Improved understanding of developmental neurobiology and paediatric analgesic drug pharmacokinetics should facilitate a better management of childhood pain. The objective of this update is to discuss the current practice and the recent advances in pediatric pain management.  Using PubMed and the Cochrane Library we conducted an extensive literature analysis on pediatric pain assessment and commonly used analgesic agents in this kind of patients. According to our results, a multimodal analgesic regimen provides a better pain control and a functional outcome in children. Cooperation and communication among the anaesthesiologist, the surgeon and the paediatrician remains essential for successful anaesthesia and pain management in childhood.

Worldwide Productivity and Research Trend of Publications Concerning Cancer-Related Neuropathic Pain: A Bibliometric Study

Cancer-related neuropathic pain is a common adverse effect in the process of cancer development and treatment and has gradually attracted the attention of researchers. The purpose of this article is to systematically review the articles on cancer-related neuropathic pain published between 2012 and 2021 and visualize the data through CiteSpace and R software. The results show that in the past 10 years, a total of 5715 articles have been published, involving 118 categories, of which the most is Clinical Neurology, followed by Neurosciences, Pharmacology Pharmacy. The country with the most published articles is the United States, followed by China and Italy. A total of 22,228 authors were involved in the study of cancer-related neuropathic pain. These historical opinions about cancer-related neuropathic pain could be an important practical basis for further research into potential development trends.

S-Nitroso-L-Cysteine Stereoselectively Blunts the Deleterious Effects of Fentanyl on Breathing While Augmenting Antinociception in Freely-Moving Rats

Endogenous and exogenously administered S-nitrosothiols modulate the activities of central and peripheral systems that control breathing. We have unpublished data showing that the deleterious effects of morphine on arterial blood-gas chemistry (i.e., pH, pCO2, pO2, and sO2) and Alveolar-arterial gradient (i.e., index of gas exchange) were markedly diminished in anesthetized Sprague Dawley rats that received a continuous intravenous infusion of the endogenous S-nitrosothiol, S-nitroso-L-cysteine. The present study extends these findings by showing that unanesthetized adult male Sprague Dawley rats receiving an intravenous infusion of S-nitroso-L-cysteine (100 or 200 nmol/kg/min) markedly diminished the ability of intravenous injections of the potent synthetic opioid, fentanyl (10, 25, and 50 μg/kg), to depress the frequency of breathing, tidal volume, and minute ventilation. Our study also found that the ability of intravenously injected fentanyl (10, 25, and 50 μg/kg) to disturb eupneic breathing, which was measured as a marked increase of the non-eupneic breathing index, was substantially reduced in unanesthetized rats receiving intravenous infusions of S-nitroso-L-cysteine (100 or 200 nmol/kg/min). In contrast, the deleterious effects of fentanyl (10, 25, and 50 μg/kg) on frequency of breathing, tidal volume, minute ventilation and non-eupneic breathing index were fully expressed in rats receiving continuous infusions (200 nmol/kg/min) of the parent amino acid, L-cysteine, or the D-isomer, namely, S-nitroso-D-cysteine. In addition, the antinociceptive actions of the above doses of fentanyl as monitored by the tail-flick latency assay, were enhanced by S-nitroso-L-cysteine, but not L-cysteine or S-nitroso-D-cysteine. Taken together, these findings add to existing knowledge that S-nitroso-L-cysteine stereoselectively modulates the detrimental effects of opioids on breathing, and opens the door for mechanistic studies designed to establish whether the pharmacological actions of S-nitroso-L-cysteine involve signaling processes that include 1) the activation of plasma membrane ion channels and receptors, 2) selective intracellular entry of S-nitroso-L-cysteine, and/or 3) S-nitrosylation events. Whether alterations in the bioavailability and bioactivity of endogenous S-nitroso-L-cysteine is a key factor in determining the potency/efficacy of fentanyl on breathing is an intriguing question.

STOP Pain Project-Opioid Response in Pediatric Cancer Patients and Gene Polymorphisms of Cytokine Pathways

Moderate to severe cancer pain treatment in children is based on the use of weak and strong opioids. Pharmacogenetics play a central role in developing personalized pain therapies, as well as avoiding treatment failure and/or intolerable adverse drug reactions. This observational study aimed to investigate the association between IL-6, IL-8, and TNFα genetic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and response to opioid therapy in a cohort of pediatric cancer patients. Pain intensity before treatment (PIt0) significantly differed according to IL-6 rs1800797 SNP, with a higher PI for A/G and G/G individuals (p = 0.017), who required a higher dose of opioids (p = 0.047). Moreover, compared to G/G subjects, heterozygous or homozygous individuals for the A allele of IL-6 rs1800797 SNP had a lower risk of having a PIt0 > 4. Dose24h and Dosetot were both higher in G/G individuals for TNFα rs1800629 (p = 0.010 and p = 0.031, respectively), while risk of having a PIt0 > 4 and a ∆VAS > 2 was higher for G/G subjects for IL-6 rs1800795 SNP compared to carriers of the C allele. No statistically significant association between genotypes and safety outcomes was found. Thus, IL-6 and TNFα SNPs could be potential markers of baseline pain intensity and opioid dose requirements in pediatric cancer patients.

Pain and Analgesia in Children with Cancer after Hemipelvectomy: A Retrospective Analysis

A paucity of data exists centering on the pain experience of children following hemipelvectomy performed for primary bone and soft tissue sarcomas. In this study, we aimed to describe the incidence, severity, and evolution of perioperative pain and function in pediatric oncology patients undergoing hemipelvectomy, and, additionally, we sought to detail the analgesic regimens used for these patients perioperatively. A retrospective chart review was conducted, studying cancer patients, aged 21 years and under, who underwent hemipelvectomy at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) from 2018 to 2021. Primary outcomes included the evolution of pain throughout the perioperative course, as well as the route, type, dose, and duration of analgesic regimens. Eight patients were included in the analysis. The mean age at operation was 13 ± 2.93 years. All patients received opioids and acetaminophen. The mean pain scores were highest on post-operative day (POD)0, POD5, and POD 30. The mean opioid use was highest on POD5. A total of 75% of patients were noted to be ambulating after hemipelvectomy. The mean time to ambulation was 5.33 ± 2.94 days. The combination of acetaminophen with opioids, as well as adjunctive regional analgesia, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gabapentin, and/or ketamine in select patients, appeared to be an effective analgesic regimen, and functional outcomes were excellent in 75% of patients.

Problems, Stressors and Needs of Children and Adolescents with Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer diseases in children and adolescents are considered to be one of the most serious health problems in the world. It is estimated that about 151,435 cases are diagnosed in children annually. Children with cancer experience many comorbid symptoms related to diagnosis and treatment that can profoundly affect their lives. They experience physical and emotional suffering, which affects their well-being and physical fitness, influencing the prognosis and deteriorating their physical, mental and social functioning. Given the limited data, an attempt was made to assess the problems of the biopsychosocial sphere of need and stressors among children and adolescents treated for cancer. Accurate symptom assessment is essential to ensure high-quality care and effective treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The qualitative study was conducted in pediatric oncology of hospitals in Poland. Children diagnosed with cancer were invited to participate in the study to assess their problems, stressors and needs.

RESULTS

The study included 520 people, where female sex constituted 48% and male 52%. The mean age of the children is 13.2 SD = 2.5. Negative experiences related to the disease are experienced by 82% of children. Among the surveyed children, the most experienced were anxiety (61%). The conducted research shows that as many as 69% of all respondents experienced states that indicate severe depression. The most common somatic problems reported by children were pain (58%). The most dominant areas of life that had a negative impact was body image (85%).

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents diagnosed with neoplastic disease experience many problems and stressors in every sphere of life, which undoubtedly affects a high level of unmet needs. The main category of needs concerning the challenges faced by children with cancer was psychological and care problems. In the youth group, the needs were mainly related to education and social support.

Opioids in cancer: The κ‑opioid receptor (Review)

The κ‑opioid receptor (KOR) is one of the primary receptors of opioids and serves a vital role in the regulation of pain, anesthesia, addiction and other pathological and physiological processes. KOR is associated with several types of cancer and may influence cancer progression. It has been proposed that KOR may represent a new tumor molecular marker and provide a novel basis for molecular targeted therapies for cancer. However, the association between KOR and cancer remains to be explored comprehensively. The present review introduces KOR and its association with different types of cancer. Improved understanding of KOR may facilitate development of novel antitumor therapies.

Evaluation of topical morphine for treatment of oral mucositis in cancer patients

Introduction

Oral mucositis is a painful side effect to chemotherapy. Orally applied opioids may offer analgesia with fewer side effects than systemic opioids.

Methods

A randomized trial comparing the analgesic effect of a morphine oromucosal solution (OM) to placebo and a positive control group receiving intravenous (IV) morphine as an add-on treatment to morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in a mixed population of paediatric and adult haematology patients. All patients in the study were equipped with a morphine PCA pump and the participating patients were instructed to use this pump as an escape. Primary outcome was morphine consumption (mg/kg/hour) on the PCA pump. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity difference at rest and when performing oral hygiene, time to first PCA bolus, nutrition intake and adverse events.

Findings

A total of 60 patients (38 children <18 years) were randomized. Thirty patients were allocated to morphine OM/placebo IV (group MO), 15 patients to placebo OM/morphine IV (group MI) and 15 patients to placebo OM/placebo IV (group P). The median morphine consumption in the MO group (22.7 mcg/kg/hour 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.4-29.4 mcg/kg/hour, p = 0.38) was not significantly different from the placebo group (24.6 mcg/kg/hour 95% CI 16.8-34.4 mcg/kg/hour, p = 0.44) or the MI group (13.7 mcg/kg/hour 95% CI 9.7-37.8 mcg/kg/hour). For the secondary outcomes, the analysis of summed pain intensity difference after the first, third and fourth administrations of study medication indicated a reduction in pain for the MI group compared to the P and MO groups. No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion

The findings indicate that the analgesic effect of peripherally applied morphine is not significantly different from placebo, and parenteral opioids should continue to be the standard of care.

Alleviating Terminal Pediatric Cancer Pain

Terminal cancer pain remains one of the most distressing aspects of pediatric oncology practice. Opioids are the cornerstone of cancer pain management at end-of-life and fortunately, most pain at end-of-life can be managed successfully. This article presents a practical step-by-step approach to alleviating pediatric terminal cancer pain, which can be delivered across settings.

Mapping the evidence and gaps of interventions for pediatric chronic pain to inform policy, research, and practice: A systematic review and quality assessment of systematic reviews

Background: Reviews in pediatric chronic pain often focus on only one intervention or population, making it difficult for policymakers and decision makers to quickly synthesize knowledge to inform larger-scale policy and funding priorities. Aims: The aims of this study were to (1) create an evidence and gap map of interventions for pediatric chronic pain and (2) identify gaps between existing evidence and recently identified patient-oriented research priorities. Methods: We performed a systematic review of English-language peer-reviewed systematic reviews or clinical practice guidelines of pediatric chronic pain intervention published in the past 20 years. Database searches of Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and SCOPUS were conducted inclusive to June 3, 2019. Review quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2. Results: Of 4168 unique abstracts, 50 systematic reviews (including 2 clinical practice guidelines) crossing diverse pediatric chronic pain populations and intervention settings were included. One third were rated high quality, with half rated low to critically low quality. The largest proportion of reviews addressed psychological and pharmacological interventions, followed by interdisciplinary, other (e.g., dietary), and physical interventions. Most common outcomes included pain, physical, emotional, and role functioning and quality of life. Treatment satisfaction and adverse events were less common, with minimal report of sleep or economic factors. Most patient-oriented research priorities had not been investigated. Conclusions: Sufficient quality evidence is available to guide evidence-informed policies in pediatric chronic pain, most notably regarding psychological and pharmacological interventions. Numerous evidence gaps in patient-oriented research priorities and treatment outcomes should guide prioritization of research funds, as well as study aims and design.

Cancer-related concerns and needs among young adults and children on cancer treatment in Tanzania: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Seventy percent of deaths of cancer occur in low or middle-income countries, where the resources to provide cancer treatment and care are minimal. Tanzania currently has very inadequate facilities for cancer treatment as there are only five sites, some with limited services; two are in Dar es Salaam and one each in Mwanza, Kilimanjaro and Mbeya that offer cancer treatment. Despite cancer being a prevalent problem in Tanzania, there is a significant shortage of information on the experiences of young people who receive cancer treatment and care. The aim of this study was to explore cancer-related concerns and needs of care and support among young adults and children who are receiving cancer treatment in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

METHODS

Using an explorative, qualitative design, two focus group discussions (FGDs) with young adults (18 to 25 years) and four FGDs with children (9 to 17 years) were held. Data were transcribed into English and analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Identified concerns included physical effects, emotional effects, financial impacts, poor early care, and poor treatment. Identified needs included the need for improved care in hospital by the staff, need for community support, financial needs, needs for improved cancer care and treatment in the hospitals, and the need for increased education about cancer. Resilience was identified, particularly around hope or faith, having hope to be healed, and receiving good care from staff.

CONCLUSION

Young adults and children receiving cancer treatment in Tanzania have many needs and concerns. Improvements with regard to the care provided in hospital by the staff, the cancer care and treatment in the hospital, and population-wide education about cancer are necessary to address the identified needs and concerns. Further studies on specific approaches to address the concerns and needs are also warranted.

When the Safe Alternative Is Not That Safe: Tramadol Prescribing in Children

Children represent a vulnerable population in which management of nociceptive pain is complex. Drug responses in children differ from adults due to age-related differences. Moreover, therapeutic choices are limited by the lack of indication for a number of analgesic drugs due to the challenge of conducting clinical trials in children. Furthermore the assessment of efficacy as well as tolerance may be complicated by children's inability to communicate properly. According to the World Health Organization, weak opioids such as tramadol and codeine, may be used in addition to paracetamol and ibuprofen for moderate nociceptive pain in both children and adults. However, codeine prescription has been restricted for the last 5 years in children because of the risk of fatal overdoses linked to the variable activity of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 which bioactivates codeine. Even though tramadol has been considered a safe alternative to codeine, it is well established that tramadol pharmacodynamic opioid effects, efficacy and safety, are also largely influenced by CYP2D6 activity. For this reason, the US Food and Drug Administration recently released a boxed warning regarding the use of tramadol in children. To provide safe and effective tramadol prescription in children, a personalized approach, with dose adaptation according to CYP2D6 activity, would certainly be the safest method. We therefore recommend this approach in children requiring chronic or recurrent nociceptive pain treatment with tramadol. In case of acute inpatients nociceptive pain management, prescribing tramadol at the minimal effective dose, in a child appropriate dosage form and after clear instructions are given to the parents, remains reasonable based on current data. In all other situations, morphine should be preferred for moderate to severe nociceptive pain conditions.

Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Antidepressants have been used in adults for pain relief and pain management since the 1970s. The clinical impression from extended use over many years is that antidepressants are useful for some neuropathic pain symptoms, and that effects on pain relief are divorced and different from effects on depression; for example, the effects of tricyclic antidepressants on pain may occur at different, and often lower, doses than those on depression. Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used drugs for treating neuropathic pain in the UK.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antidepressants used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antidepressant with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies with a total of 272 participants (6 to 18 years of age) who had either chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, or functional dyspepsia. All of the studies were small. One study investigated amitriptyline versus gabapentin (34 participants), two studies investigated amitriptyline versus placebo (123 participants), and one study investigated citalopram versus placebo (115 participants). Due to a lack of available data we were unable to complete any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the four included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation and allocation concealment (low to unclear risk); blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors (low to unclear risk); reporting of results (low to unclear risk); and size of the study populations (high risk). We judged the remaining domains, attrition and other potential sources of bias, as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesNo studies reported our primary outcomes of participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater or 50% or greater (very low-quality evidence).No studies reported on Patient Global Impression of Change (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low because there was no evidence to support or refute. Secondary outcomesAll studies measured adverse events, with very few reported (11 out of 272 participants). All but one adverse event occurred in the active treatment groups (amitriptyline, citalopram, and gabapentin). Adverse events in all studies, across active treatment and comparator groups, were considered to be a mild reaction, such as nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, and abdominal discomfort (very low-quality evidence).There were also very few withdrawals due to adverse events, again all but one from the active treatment groups (very low-quality evidence).No serious adverse events were reported across any of the studies (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for these secondary outcomes as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified only a small number of studies with small numbers of participants and insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.There is evidence from adult randomised controlled trials that some antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, can provide some pain relief in certain chronic non-cancer pain conditions.There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children or adolescents.

Antiepileptic drugs for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can occur in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) relating to genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and for other unknown reasons.Antiepileptic (anticonvulsant) drugs, which were originally developed to treat convulsions in people with epilepsy, have in recent years been used to provide pain relief in adults for many chronic painful conditions and are now recommended for the treatment of chronic pain in the WHO list of essential medicines. Known side effects of antiepileptic drugs range from sweating, headache, elevated temperature, nausea, and abdominal pain to more serious effects including mental or motor function impairment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antiepileptic drugs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews as well as online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, by any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antiepileptic drug with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods if data were available. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created two 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with a total of 141 participants (aged 7 to 18 years) with chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-I), or fibromyalgia. One study investigated pregabalin versus placebo in participants with fibromyalgia (107 participants), and the other study investigated gabapentin versus amitriptyline in participants with CRPS-I or neuropathic pain (34 participants). We were unable to perform any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the two included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation (low to unclear risk), blinding of outcome assessors (low to unclear risk), reporting bias (low to unclear risk), the size of the study populations (high risk), and industry funding in the 'other' domain (low to unclear risk). We judged the remaining domains of sequence generation, blinding of participants and personnel, and attrition as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesOne study (gabapentin 900 mg/day versus amitriptyline 10 mg/day, 34 participants, for 6 weeks) did not report our primary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).The second study (pregabalin 75 to 450 mg/day versus placebo 75 to 450 mg/day, 107 participants, for 15 weeks) reported no significant change in pain scores for pain relief of 30% or greater between pregabalin 18/54 (33.3%), and placebo 16/51 (31.4%), P = 0.83 (very low-quality evidence). This study also reported Patient Global Impression of Change, with the percentage of participants feeling "much or very much improved" with pregabalin 53.1%, and placebo 29.5% (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low for one of two reasons: due to the fact that there was no evidence to support or refute the use of the intervention, or that there were too few data and the number of events was too small to be meaningful. Secondary outcomesIn one small study, adverse events were uncommon: gabapentin 2 participants (2 adverse events); amitriptyline 1 participant (1 adverse event) (6-week trial). The second study reported a higher number of adverse events: pregabalin 38 participants (167 adverse events); placebo 34 participants (132 adverse events) (15-week trial) (very low-quality evidence).Withdrawals due to adverse events were infrequent in both studies: pregabalin (4 participants), placebo (4 participants), gabapentin (2 participants), and amitriptyline (1 participant) (very low-quality evidence).Serious adverse events were reported in both studies. One study reported only one serious adverse event (cholelithiasis and major depression resulting in hospitalisation in the pregabalin group) and the other study reported no serious adverse events (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified only two small studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we were unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we could not comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some antiepileptics, such as gabapentin and pregabalin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.We found no evidence to support or refute the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol as priority areas) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in children and adolescents in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications: nociceptive, neuropathic, idiopathic, visceral, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and other unknown reasons.Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is one of the most widely used analgesics in both adults and children. The recommended dosage in the UK, Europe, Australia, and the USA for children and adolescents is generally 10 to 15 mg/kg every four to six hours, with specific age ranges from 60 mg (6 to 12 months old) up to 500 to 1000 mg (over 12 years old). Paracetamol is the only recommended analgesic for children under 3 months of age. Paracetamol has been proven to be safe in appropriate and controlled dosages, however potential adverse effects of paracetamol if overdosed or overused in children include liver and kidney failure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of paracetamol (acetaminophen) used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing paracetamol with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat, using standard methods where data were available. We assessed GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and planned to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. We rated the quality of the evidence as very low. We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels due to the lack of data reported for any outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of paracetamol (acetaminophen) to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. We are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of paracetamol to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that paracetamol, can be effective, in certain doses, and in certain pain conditions (not always chronic).This means that no conclusions could be made about efficacy or harm in the use of paracetamol (acetaminophen) to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to treat pain, reduce fever, and for their anti-inflammation properties. They are commonly used within paediatric pain management. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are currently licensed for use in Western countries, however they are not approved for infants under three months old. The main adverse effects include renal impairment and gastrointestinal issues. Common side effects in children include diarrhoea, headache, nausea, constipation, rash, dizziness, and abdominal pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of NSAIDs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, as well as online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any NSAID with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies with a total of 1074 participants (aged 2 to 18 years) with chronic juvenile polyarthritis or chronic juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. All seven studies compared an NSAID with an active comparator. None of the studies were placebo controlled. No two studies investigated the same type of NSAID compared with another. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis.Risk of bias varied. For randomisation and allocation concealment, one study was low risk and six studies were unclear risk. For blinding of participants and personnel, three studies were low risk and four studies were unclear to high risk. For blinding of outcome assessors, all studies were unclear risk. For attrition, four studies were low risk and three studies were unclear risk. For selective reporting, four studies were low risk, two studies were unclear risk, and one study was high risk. For size, three studies were unclear risk and four studies were high risk. For other potential sources of bias, seven studies were low risk. Primary outcomesThree studies reported participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater, showing no statistically significant difference in pain scores between meloxicam and naproxen, celecoxib and naproxen, or rofecoxib and naproxen (P > 0.05) (low-quality evidence).One study reported participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, showing no statistically significant difference in pain scores between low-dose meloxicam (0.125 mg/kg) and high-dose meloxicam (0.25 mg/kg) when compared to naproxen 10 mg/kg (P > 0.05) (low-quality evidence).One study reported Patient Global Impression of Change, showing 'very much improved' in 85% of ibuprofen and 90% of aspirin participants (low-quality evidence). Secondary outcomesAll seven studies reported adverse events. Participants reporting an adverse event (one or more per person) by drug were: aspirin 85/202; fenoprofen 28/49; ibuprofen 40/45; indomethacin 9/30; ketoprofen 9/30; meloxicam 18/47; naproxen 44/202; and rofecoxib 47/209 (very low-quality evidence).All seven studies reported withdrawals due to adverse events. Participants withdrawn due to an adverse event by drug were: aspirin 16/120; celecoxib 10/159; fenoprofen 0/49; ibuprofen 0/45; indomethacin 0/30; ketoprofen 0/30; meloxicam 10/147; naproxen 17/285; and rofecoxib 3/209 (very low-quality evidence).All seven studies reported serious adverse events. Participants experiencing a serious adverse event by drug were: aspirin 13/120; celecoxib 5/159; fenoprofen 0/79; ketoprofen 0/30; ibuprofen 4/45; indomethacin 0/30; meloxicam 11/147; naproxen 10/285; and rofecoxib 0/209 (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning as defined by validated scales; and quality of life as defined by validated scales (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for our primary and secondary outcomes as very low because there were limited data from studies and no opportunity for a meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified only a small number of studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of NSAIDs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some NSAIDs, such as ibuprofen, naproxen, and aspirin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.

Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol as priority areas) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in children and adolescents in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications: nociceptive, neuropathic, idiopathic, visceral, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and other unknown reasons.Opioids are used worldwide for the treatment of pain. They bind to opioid receptors in the central nervous system (mu, kappa, delta, and sigma) and can be agonists, antagonists, mixed agonist-antagonists, or partial agonists. Opioids are generally available in healthcare settings across most high-income countries, but access may be restricted in low- and middle-income countries. For example, opioids currently available in the UK include: buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, and tramadol. Opioids are used in varying doses (generally based on body weight for paediatric patients) by means of parenteral, transmucosal, transdermal, or oral administration (immediate release or modified release). To achieve adequate pain relief in children using opioids, with an acceptable grade of adverse effects, the recommended method is a lower dose gradually titrated to effect in the child.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of opioids used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing opioids with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and planned to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. We rated the quality of the evidence as very low. We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels due to the lack of data reported for any outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. We are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some opioids, such as morphine and codeine, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.This means that no conclusions could be made about efficacy or harm in the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for cancer-related pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for persisting pain in children acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. Views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important. In the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, and it was assumed that children quickly forgot about painful experiences.We designed a suite of seven reviews in chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol as priority areas) to review the evidence for children's pain using pharmacological interventions.As one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity for children and adolescents in the world today, childhood cancer (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Specific mortality and morbidity data relating to children are not currently identified. All childhood cancer rates are on the rise; for example, in the USA approximately 10,380 children aged under 15 years were expected to be diagnosed with cancer by the end of 2016. However, with survival rates also increasing, over 80% of paediatric cancer patients are expected to survive for five years or more, thus identifying the need to address pain management in this population.Cancer pain in infants, children, and adolescents is primarily nociceptive pain with negative long term effects. Cancer-related pain is generally caused directly by the tumour itself such as compressing on the nerve or inflammation of the organs. Cancer-related pain generally occurs as a result of perioperative procedures, nerve damage caused by radiation or chemotherapy treatments, or mucositis. However, this review focused on pain caused directly by the tumour itself such as nerve infiltration, external nerve compression, and other inflammatory events.Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to treat pain, reduce fever, and for their anti-inflammatory properties. They are commonly used within paediatric pain management. NSAIDs are currently licensed for use in western countries, however not approved for infants aged under three months. Primary adverse effects include gastrointestinal issues and possible renal impairment with long term use. Other adverse effects in children include diarrhoea, headache, nausea, constipation, rash, dizziness, and abdominal pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy, and adverse events, of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) used to treat cancer-related pain in children and adolescents aged from birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 21 February 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind trials of any dose, and any route, treating cancer-related pain in children and adolescents, comparing NSAIDs with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and planned to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were eligible for inclusion in this review (very low quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels due to the lack of data reported for any outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduce cancer-related pain in children and adolescents. This means that no reliance or conclusions can be made about efficacy or harm in the use of NSAIDs to treat chronic cancer-related pain in children and adolescents.

Opioids for cancer pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common symptom with cancer, and 30% to 50% of all people with cancer will experience moderate to severe pain that can have a major negative impact on their quality of life. Opioid (morphine-like) drugs are commonly used to treat moderate or severe cancer pain, and are recommended for this purpose in the World Health Organization (WHO) pain treatment ladder. The most commonly-used opioid drugs are buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol, and tapentadol.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the analgesic efficacy of opioids in cancer pain, and to report on adverse events associated with their use.

METHODS

We identified systematic reviews examining any opioid for cancer pain published to 4 May 2017 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were no or mild pain within 14 days of starting treatment, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine reviews with 152 included studies and 13,524 participants, but because some studies appeared in more than one review the number of unique studies and participants was smaller than this. Most participants had moderate or severe pain associated with a range of different types of cancer. Studies in the reviews typically compared one type of opioid or formulation with either a different formulation of the same opioid, or a different opioid; few included a placebo control. Typically the reviews titrated dose to effect, a balance between pain relief and adverse events. Various routes of administration of opioids were considered in the reviews; oral with most opioids, but transdermal administration with fentanyl, and buprenorphine. No review included studies of subcutaneous opioid administration. Pain outcomes reported were varied and inconsistent. The average size of included studies varied considerably between reviews: studies of older opioids, such as codeine, morphine, and methadone, had low average study sizes while those involving newer drugs tended to have larger study sizes.Six reviews reported a GRADE assessment (buprenorphine, codeine, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, and tramadol), but not necessarily for all comparisons or outcomes. No comparative analyses were possible because there was no consistent placebo or active control. Cohort outcomes for opioids are therefore reported, as absolute numbers or percentages, or both.Reviews on buprenorphine, codeine with or without paracetamol, hydromorphone, methadone, tramadol with or without paracetamol, tapentadol, and oxycodone did not have information about the primary outcome of mild or no pain at 14 days, although that on oxycodone indicated that average pain scores were within that range. Two reviews, on oral morphine and transdermal fentanyl, reported that 96% of 850 participants achieved that goal.Adverse event withdrawal was reported by five reviews, at rates of between 6% and 19%. Participants with at least one adverse event were reported by three reviews, at rates of between 11% and 77%.Our GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low for all outcomes, because many studies in the reviews were at high risk of bias from several sources, including small study size.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The amount and quality of evidence around the use of opioids for treating cancer pain is disappointingly low, although the evidence we have indicates that around 19 out of 20 people with moderate or severe pain who are given opioids and can tolerate them should have that pain reduced to mild or no pain within 14 days. This accords with the clinical experience in treating many people with cancer pain, but overstates to some extent the effectiveness found for the WHO pain ladder. Most people will experience adverse events, and help may be needed to manage the more common undesirable adverse effects such as constipation and nausea. Perhaps between 1 in 10 and 2 in 10 people treated with opioids will find these adverse events intolerable, leading to a change in treatment.