The patient burden of opioid-induced constipation: New insights from a large, multinational survey in five European countries

Opioid-induced Constipation: Old and New Concepts in Diagnosis and Treatment

Daily use of opioid analgesics has significantly increased in recent years due to an increasing prevalence of conditions associated with chronic pain. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the most common, under-recognized, and under-treated side effects of opioid analgesics. OIC significantly reduces the quality of life by causing psychological distress, lowering work productivity, and increasing access to healthcare facilities. The economic and social burden of OIC led to the development of precise strategies for daily clinical practice. Key aspects are the prevention of constipation through adequate water intake and fiber support, avoidance of sedentariness, and early recognition and treatment of cofactors that could worsen constipation. Recommended first-line therapy includes osmotic (preferably polyethylene glycol) and stimulant laxatives. Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists, such as methylnaltrexone, naloxegol, or naldemedine, should be used in patients that have not responded to the first-line treatments. The bowel functional index is the main tool for assessing the severity of OIC and for monitoring the response. The paper discusses the recent literature on the pathophysiology, clinical evaluation, and management of OIC and provides a pragmatic approach for its assessment and treatment.

Effect of opioids on constipation in critically ill patients: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis evaluated the effect of opioids on constipation in ICU patients.

REVIEW METHOD USED

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang DATA databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Random or fixed-effects meta-analyses were used. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the definition of constipation (three vs. six days), opioids (fentanyl vs. morphine), study design (prospective vs. retrospective), adjustment of confounders (No vs. Yes), and patient's age (adults vs. children). We used sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of results with significant statistical heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Seven studies (2264 patients) were included. Opioid use in ICU patients was associated with an increased risk of constipation (relative risk [RR]=1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.05 to 1.24; I2=49.8%). Subgroup analysis further showed that adjustment form, category of opioid, study design, and patient's age significantly influenced the relationship between opioid use and the risk of constipation. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of pooled results.

CONCLUSION

Opioids significantly increase the risk of constipation in critically ill patients, especially children. It is worth noting that the adjustment of the constipation definition used for ICU significantly influenced the relationship between opioid use and the risk of constipation. Therefore, It is necessary to clearly define ICU constipation and conduct time-based layered treatment. Additional prospective studies are needed to investigate the consistent definition of ICU constipation.

Prevalence and Burden of Illness of Rome IV Chronic Idiopathic Constipation, Opioid-Induced Constipation, and Opioid-Exacerbated Constipation in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) and opioid-induced constipation (OIC) are disorders that negatively affect quality of life. We sought to assess the prevalence, symptom severity, and medication use among people with Rome IV CIC, OIC, and opioid-exacerbated constipation (OEC) using a nationally representative data set with nearly 89,000 people in the United States.

METHODS

From May 3, 2020, to June 24, 2020, we recruited a representative sample of people in the United States ≥ 18 years to complete an online national health survey. The survey guided participants through the Rome IV CIC and OIC questionnaires, Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System gastrointestinal scales (percentile 0-100; higher = more severe), and medication questions. Individuals with OEC were identified by asking those with OIC whether they experienced constipation before starting an opioid and whether their symptoms worsened afterward.

RESULTS

Among the 88,607 participants, 5,334 (6.0%) had Rome IV CIC, and 1,548 (1.7%) and 335 (0.4%) had Rome IV OIC and OEC, respectively. When compared with people with CIC (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System score, 53.9 ± 26.5; reference), those with OIC (62.7 ± 28.0; adjusted P < 0.001) and OEC (61.1 ± 25.8, adjusted P = 0.048) had more severe constipation symptoms. People with OIC (odds ratio 2.72, 95% confidence interval 2.04-3.62) and OEC (odds ratio 3.52, 95% confidence interval 2.22-5.59) were also more likely to be taking a prescription medication for their constipation vs those with CIC.

DISCUSSION

In this nationwide US survey, we found that Rome IV CIC is common (6.0%) while Rome IV OIC (1.7%) and OEC (0.4%) are less prevalent. Individuals with OIC and OEC have a higher burden of illness with respect to symptom severity and prescription constipation medication use.

Response Rates to Methylnaltrexone in Hospitalized Cancer Patients

Context: Methylnaltrexone is a peripherally-acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist studied in both cancer and non-cancer patients with opioid-induced constipation (OIC), but mostly in the outpatient setting. For adult hospitalized cancer patients with OIC, its effectiveness is unknown. Objectives: Describe the efficacy of methylnaltrexone for OIC in the inpatient setting, defined as bowel movement (BM) within 24 hours of methylnaltrexone administration. Methods: We performed a single-center, retrospective chart review of all hospitalized, adult patients with a cancer diagnosis who received methylnaltrexone from the palliative care team between January 1st, 2012 and July 1st, 2019. Results: We identified 194 patients. The mean age was 59, 50.5% were male and 88% were white. 192 patients (98%) received the 8 mg dose subcutaneously. The median oral morphine equivalent (OME) was 135 mg (IQR 70-354 mg). 45% (95% confidence interval, 38-53%) had a BM within 24 hours. Higher OME was correlated with successful BM, with a response in 93% (86/92) of patients receiving ≥150 OME and 2% (2/102) of patients receiving <150 OME (P < .0001). Prior laxative use did not predict response at 24 hours whether these were osmotic laxatives (40.7% vs 47.1%, P = .52), stimulant laxatives (45.7% vs 45.2%, P > .99), or stool softeners (44.7% vs 46.1%, P = .89). Conclusion: Methylnaltrexone has a high response rate when used as treatment for OIC in hospitalized adult cancer patients, especially for patients taking ≥150 OME.

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Effectiveness of Naldemedine in the Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients With Cancer Pain: Post-hoc Subgroup Analysis of Post-marketing Surveillance in Japan

BACKGROUND

Opioid-induced constipation is common and greatly affects the quality of life but is often under-recognised and undertreated. This study aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation with cancer pain according to specific subgroups of clinical interest.

METHODS

In this exploratory post-hoc subgroup analysis of post-marketing surveillance from Japan (UMIN: 000042851), data were investigated by the subgroups: age (≥75, <75 years), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS 0-2, 3-4), constipation severity (mild, moderate, severe), brain metastasis (yes, no), anticancer drug treatment (yes, no), opioid at naldemedine initiation (fentanyl only, only strong opioids other than fentanyl, weak opioids only, other), and prior or concomitant use of laxative (only osmotic/saline laxatives, only stimulant laxatives, other, none). Enrolled patients (n = 1184) received naldemedine (0.2 mg once daily) orally for up to 12 weeks. Regarding safety endpoints, the incidence of adverse drug reactions, including diarrhoea, was determined within each subgroup. Regarding effectiveness endpoints, improvement rates in the frequency and condition of bowel movements were investigated by subgroups.

RESULTS

The incidence of adverse drug reactions, including diarrhoea, among subgroups ranged from 7.74% to 16.08% (diarrhoea: 5.95% to 13.19%), compared to 11.30% (diarrhoea: 9.09%) in the total population. Through week two to week 12, improvement rates in the frequency and condition of bowel movement among subgroups ranged from 63.6% to 89.7% and 67.6% to 94.9%, compared to 75.0% to 83.2% and 80.0% to 88.0% in the total population, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Naldemedine was well tolerated and effective in patients with opioid-induced constipation and cancer pain regardless of the subgroups investigated.

Iatrogenic Side Effects of Pain Therapies

Pain regimens, particularly for chronic cancer and noncancer pain, must balance the important analgesic benefits against potential risks. Many effective and frequently used pain control regimens are associated with iatrogenic adverse events. Interventional procedures can be associated with nerve injuries, vascular injuries, trauma to the spinal cord, and epidural abscesses. Although rare, these adverse events are potentially catastrophic. Pharmacologic remedies for pain must also consider potential side effects that can occur even at therapeutic doses of over-the-counter remedies such as paracetamol (acetaminophen) or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Opioids are effective pain relievers but are associated with many side effects, some of which can be treatment limiting. A prevalent and distressing side effect of opioid therapy is constipation. Opioid-induced constipation is caused by binding to opioid receptors in the gastrointestinal system, making conventional laxatives ineffective. Peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists are a new drug class that offers the benefits of preserving opioid analgesia without side effects in the gastrointestinal system. An important safety concern, particularly among geriatric patients is the increasingly prevalent condition of polypharmacy. Many senior patients take five or more medications, including some that may be contraindicated in geriatric patients, duplicative of other drugs, have potential pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions, or may not be the optimal choice for the patient's age and condition. Careful assessment of medications in the elderly, including possibly deprescribing with tapering of certain drugs, may be warranted but should be done systematically and under clinical supervision.

A Nationwide Hospital Claims Database Analysis of Real-World Patterns of Laxative Use for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Japanese Patients with Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the most common side effects in patients with cancer treated with opioid analgesics. The actual use of laxatives for OIC in Japan remains unelucidated. This study aimed to investigate the real-world patterns of laxative use for patients with cancer who newly initiated opioid analgesic therapy.

METHODS

We used a Japanese nationwide hospital claims database (January 2018-December 2019). Patients with cancer newly receiving opioid analgesic therapy were included and classified on the basis of opioid classes (weak or strong) and route of administration (oral or transdermal) at initiation. The patients were divided into two groups on the basis of whether they received early medication (starting laxatives within 3 days after initiating opioid analgesic therapy), and patterns of laxative use were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 26,939 eligible patients, with 50.7% of them initiated with strong opioids. The proportion of patients who received early medication was 25.0% for weak opioids and 57.3% for strong opioids. Osmotic laxatives were most frequently used as first-line therapy in the early medication group (oral weak opioids: 12.3%, oral strong opioids: 29.4%, transdermal strong opioids: 12.8%). Stimulant laxatives were frequently used as first-line therapy, to the same extent or more than osmotic laxatives in the non-early medication group (oral weak opioids: 13.7%, oral strong opioids: 7.7%, transdermal strong opioids: 15.1%). Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists were the second most frequently used in the early medication group for those on oral strong opioids (9.4%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated for the first time that the patterns of laxative use for OIC in Japanese patients with cancer were different, depending on the opioid types at initiation and the timing of laxative medication.

Bispecific sigma-1 receptor antagonism and mu-opioid receptor partial agonism: WLB-73502, an analgesic with improved efficacy and safety profile compared to strong opioids

Opioids are the most effective painkillers, but their benefit-risk balance often hinder their therapeutic use. WLB-73502 is a dual, bispecific compound that binds sigma-1 (S1R) and mu-opioid (MOR) receptors. WLB-73502 is an antagonist at the S1R. It behaved as a partial MOR agonist at the G-protein pathway and produced no/unsignificant β-arrestin-2 recruitment, thus demonstrating low intrinsic efficacy on MOR at both signalling pathways. Despite its partial MOR agonism, WLB-73502 exerted full antinociceptive efficacy, with potency superior to morphine and similar to oxycodone against nociceptive, inflammatory and osteoarthritis pain, and superior to both morphine and oxycodone against neuropathic pain. WLB-73502 crosses the blood-brain barrier and binds brain S1R and MOR to an extent consistent with its antinociceptive effect. Contrary to morphine and oxycodone, tolerance to its antinociceptive effect did not develop after repeated 4-week administration. Also, contrary to opioid comparators, WLB-73502 did not inhibit gastrointestinal transit or respiratory function in rats at doses inducing full efficacy, and it was devoid of proemetic effect (retching and vomiting) in ferrets at potentially effective doses. WLB-73502 benefits from its bivalent S1R antagonist and partial MOR agonist nature to provide an improved antinociceptive and safety profile respect to strong opioid therapy.

The effects of loperamide on excitatory and inhibitory neuromuscular function in the human colon

BACKGROUND

In most animal species, opioids alter colonic motility via the inhibition of excitatory enteric motor neurons. The mechanisms by which opioids alter human colonic motility are unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the effects of loperamide on neuromuscular function in the human colon.

METHODS

Tissue specimens of human colon from 10 patients undergoing an anterior resection were divided into three inter-taenial circular muscle strips. Separate organ baths were used to assess: (1) excitatory transmission (selective blockade of inhibitory transmission: L-NOARG/MRS2179); (2) inhibitory transmission (selective blockade of excitatory transmission: hyoscine hydrobromide); and (3) a control bath (no drug additions). Neuromuscular function was assessed using force transducer recordings and electrical field stimulation (EFS; 20 V, 10 Hz, 0.5 ms, 10 s) prior to and following loperamide and naloxone.

KEY RESULTS

In human preparations with L-NOARG/MRS2179, loperamide had no significant effects on isometric contractions. In preparations with hyoscine hydrobromide, loperamide reduced isometric relaxation during EFS (median difference + 0.60 g post-loperamide, Z = -2.35, p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Loperamide had no effect on excitatory neuromuscular function in human colonic circular muscle. These findings suggest that loperamide alters colonic function by acting primarily on inhibitory motor neurons, premotor enteric neurons, or via alternative non-opioid receptor pathways.

Constipation Severity and Quality of Life among Patients with Cancer Who Received Prophylactic Laxatives: Quasi-Experimental Study

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic laxatives were associated with decreasing the incidence of Opioid-induced constipation among patients with cancer. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of early prophylactic laxatives therapy on the severity of constipation and quality of life among patients with cancer receiving opioids.

METHODS

Using a quasi-experimental design with 64 patients assigned to control group and 66 patients assigned to intervention group. The final sample was composed from 112 patients (57 in control group and 55 in intervention group), who were selected from an oncology clinic. Patients in the intervention group have received prophylactical laxatives The intervention included an oral colonic stimulant laxative (i.e., Bisacodyl, Dose= 3 tab/ day and/or Senna 6.8 mg twice daily) and an oral colonic osmotic laxative (i.e., Lactulose, Dose = 15 ml three times per day). Patients in the control group continue to receive their routine care without laxatives.

RESULTS

Patients in the intervention group have reported a significant reduction in the severity of constipation symptoms at eight weeks post the intervention (p &lt; 0.001). Furthermore, the patients in the intervention group have revealed a significant improvement in their quality of life (QoL) (p&lt; 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cancer need to use the first line of laxatives as prophylactic alongside with opioids to minimize the severity of Opioid-induced constipation symptoms and to enhance the QoL.

Rationale and design of a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the effects of naldemedine on opioid-induced constipation for patients with cancer pain: A study protocol

Background

It is unclear which laxatives are appropriate to prevent opioid-induced constipation (OIC). This study will evaluate whether prophylactic use of naldemedine prevents OIC in patients with cancer who start opioid administration.

Methods

This study is a multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients who meet the eligibility criteria and give consent will be randomly assigned to the naldemedine or placebo group. Both groups will take each drug once a day after breakfast for 14 days.

Results

The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with a Bowel Function Index of less than 28.8 on Day 14. The secondary endpoints include assessment scales of the impact of constipation on comprehensive quality of life.

Conclusions

This is the first study proposed to assess the superiority of naldemedine over placebo in the prevention of OIC. If naldemedine is found to be effective in reducing OIC compared with the placebo, it will be regarded as a new standard for OIC prophylaxis at opioid initiation.

Trial registration

jRCT identifier: jRCTs031200397. Registered March 5, 2021, https://rctportal.niph.go.jp/en/detail?trial_id=jRCTs031200397.

A Survey of the Incidence of Constipation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain Using Opioid Analgesics in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Although opioids have potent analgesic properties, their use is associated with side effects, including opioid-induced constipation (OIC). This study investigated the incidence of OIC based on the Rome IV diagnostic criteria in patients using opioid analgesics for chronic non-cancer pain and to explore and compare the risk factors for the development of OIC in opioid analgesic users.

METHODS

We surveyed patients aged 20 years or more living in Japan via the internet; who had been using opioid or non-opioid analgesics (N = 500 each) for at least 3 months for relief from chronic non-cancer musculoskeletal pain (low back pain or osteoarthritis); and who provided electronic consent to participate in and complete the survey. The groups were matched for age and sex.

RESULTS

Of the patients using opioid analgesics, 89% were taking weak opioids. The proportion of patients perceiving constipation was comparable between the opioid and non-opioid analgesic groups (34% vs 29%, respectively); however, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the opioid group, compared to the non-opioid group, reported self-assessed constipation (40% vs 18%, respectively) after using an analgesic and fulfilled two or more symptoms of the Rome IV diagnostic criteria for constipation (28% vs 19%, respectively). A higher proportion of patients were taking prescribed medicine for constipation in the opioid group compared with the non-opioid group (33% vs 18%, respectively). Low back pain, but not opioid strength and scheduled dosing, was identified as a risk factor for OIC among various covariates assessed in the logistic regression analysis in 81 patients with OIC and Rome IV diagnosis vs 419 patients without OIC in the opioid group.

CONCLUSION

Use of opioid analgesics, including weak opioids, for treating chronic non-cancer musculoskeletal pain is associated with OIC. This finding highlights the need for appropriate treatment of constipation in patients with chronic non-cancer pain in Japan.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000043985.

Opioid-Associated Anorectal Dysfunction in Chronic Constipation

INTRODUCTION

The role of anorectal and defecatory dysfunction in opioid-related constipation is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between opioid use and rectal sensation, defecatory function, and balloon expulsion on anorectal physiology testing.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adults undergoing high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) at a tertiary center for constipation. Clinical characteristics, medication use, and HRAM findings were obtained. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher-exact/student t-test for univariate analyses and logistic/general linear regression for multivariable analyses to compare patients with no opioid use, recent (< 3 months) use, and distant (> 3 months) use.

RESULTS

424 patients (49.8 ± 17.2 years; 85.6% female) were included. Compared to those without opioid history, patients with recent use had increased volumes for first rectal sensation (70.4 mL vs 59.4, p = 0.043), urge (120.5 mL vs 101.5, p = 0.017), and maximal tolerance (170.2 mL vs 147.2, p = 0.0018), but not patients with distant use. Recent opioid use was associated with increased risk of dyssynergic defecation (DD) (61.8% vs 46.4%, p = 0.035), but not failed balloon expulsion. On multivariable models controlling for potential confounders, recent opioid use, but not distant use, remained independently correlated with increased volumes for first rectal sensation (β-coefficient 9.78, p = 0.019), urge (β-coefficient 16.7, p = 0.0060), and maximal tolerance (β-coefficient 22.9, p = 0.0032), and higher risk for DD (aOR = 2.18, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Recent opioid use was an independent risk factor for rectal hyposensitivity and DD on HRAM in patients with constipation, but that effect may decrease with discontinuation of use. Anorectal physiology testing should be considered in patients with opioid-associated constipation.

Opioid-Induced Constipation in Real-World Practice: A Physician Survey, 1 Year Later

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is the most common adverse effect of opioid therapy, but it is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Last year, a survey among Italian healthcare providers revealed important differences in the clinical management of OIC across physician specialties, the need of standardization of diagnosis and treatment, and the urgency of further education. Herein, we submitted an updated version of the survey to the same cohort of experts to evaluate potential progress.

METHODS

The online survey included 15 questions about OIC. Responses were analyzed descriptively and aggregated by physician specialty.

RESULTS

A total of 190 physicians completed the survey. Most respondents (65%) did not feel adequately educated about OIC despite general consensus regarding interest in the topic and acknowledgement of OIC impact on patients' QoL and adherence to opioid therapy. Overall, 55-77% of physicians regularly evaluated intestinal function or OIC symptoms in patients receiving opioid therapy, with one-third of respondents implementing it in the past year. Even though the most common method for assessment was still patient diary, the use of specific scales underwent a small but significant increase compared to the previous year, with major implementation in the use of Rome IV criteria. As regards first-line treatment, most respondents (49%) preferred macrogol prophylaxis followed by macrogol plus another laxative. For second-line treatment, we revealed a growth in the prescription of peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs), with 46% of all the respondents having increased their use during the past year.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some limitations, our study demonstrated a slow but important step closer to standardization of diagnosis and treatment of OIC. Further educational and training efforts should be put in place to favor best evidence-based clinical practice.

Opioid-Induced Constipation: Cost Impact of Approved Medications in the Emergency Department

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) prescription medications (OIC-Rx) like methylnaltrexone subcutaneous (SC) have shown efficacy in treating OIC in the emergency department (ED). This study aimed to describe and compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs in ED patients with OIC receiving OIC-Rx versus those not receiving OIC-Rx.

METHODS

Adult patients with OIC during an ED encounter were identified from a hospital-based ED encounters database (2016-2019) and classified on the basis of receipt of OIC-Rx (OIC-Rx versus No OIC-Rx cohorts). Entropy balancing was used to reweight characteristics of the two cohorts. HRU and healthcare costs were measured and compared during the ED encounter and 30-day post-discharge period.

RESULTS

Among 11,135 patients in the OIC-Rx cohort (21,474 in the No OIC-Rx cohort), 93% received methylnaltrexone SC. Patients in the OIC-Rx cohort had 0.7 fewer inpatient days per OIC ED encounter and 64% decreased odds of being hospitalized versus the No OIC-Rx cohort (both p < 0.001). During the post-discharge period, the OIC-Rx cohort had 35% decreased odds of any re-encounter (p < 0.001). The OIC-Rx cohort had a $732 reduction in costs per OIC ED encounter versus the No OIC-Rx cohort (p < 0.001), driven by larger hospitals and patients with Medicare or Commercial insurance. During the post-discharge period, the OIC-Rx cohort had a $421 reduction in costs associated with any re-encounter versus the No OIC-Rx cohort (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving OIC-Rx in the ED had decreased odds of being hospitalized and fewer re-encounters in the 30-day post-discharge period versus patients who did not receive OIC-Rx, resulting in cost savings for insurance agencies and healthcare providers.

[Tapentadol versus classical WHO-III opioids for chronic back pain. Health services research study based on representative data from health insurance funds]

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

In clinical trials, tapentadol prolonged release (PR) showed a more favourable gastrointestinal tolerability profile compared to other strong opioids in the treatment of pain. The present analysis compared tapentadol PR and classical WHO-III PR opioids in routine clinical practice.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort study (matched pair approach) using anonymised health insurance data of patients with chronic low back pain who were prescribed strong opioids following pretreatment with WHO-I/II analgesics. Data were analysed from the date of first prescription in 2015 over a maximum period of two years. The primary analysis parameter was the prescription of laxatives.

RESULTS

Data of 227 patients per cohort could be included in the analysis. Significantly fewer tapentadol PR than WHO-III PR patients were prescribed laxatives (20.3% vs. 37%; p < 0.0001). In addition, laxative dosages were significantly lower in the tapentadol PR cohort (26.4 vs. 82.5 defined daily doses; p < 0.0001). A significant difference in laxative prescription was also observed under long-term treatment (tapentadol PR patients 27.7% vs. WHO-III PR patients 50%; p = 0.0029).

CONCLUSION

Routine clinical practice indirectly confirmed the more favourable gastrointestinal tolerability of tapentadol PR in the treatment of chronic pain which had previously been demonstrated in clinical trials and non-interventional studies.

Prevalence of drug-induced constipation and severity of associated biopsychosocial effects in patients with nonmalignant pain: a cross-sectional review of depersonalized data from the German Pain e-Registry

BACKGROUND

Drug-induced constipation (DIC) is a well-known comorbidity of cancer pain, however, data on its prevalence in nonmalignant pain (NMP) and its biopsychosocial effects are few.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence and impact of DIC in patients with NMP.

METHODS

Exploratory noninterventional, retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of depersonalized routine data of the German Pain e-Registry on 150,488 NMP patients (EUPAS identifier: 42286).

RESULTS

DIC affects 33.5% of NMP patients. The most prevalent risk factors were the use of strong opioid analgesics and analgesic polymedication. Patients with DIC presented with significantly worse biopsychosocial scores as well as significantly higher percentages of individuals with severe deterioration of pain, daily life activities, physical and mental quality of life, mood, and overall wellbeing. Among patients with DIC, those who reported constipation as a clinical symptom and who documented bowel-function index (BFI) scores above the reference range were significantly more affected compared to those who either reported only constipation as an adverse event or elevated BFI scores. 55.9% of patients with DIC reported the use of laxatives, mostly over-the-counter preparations (43.6%), whereas prescription laxatives were taken by only 29.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

DIC is a frequent comorbidity of pain management and affects around one-third of patients with NMP. It interferes significantly with pain-related biopsychosocial effects and has to be addressed specifically to improve the overall burden in affected patients. However, the use of laxatives was significantly less frequent than recommended indicating significant room for improvement.

Impact and Consequences of Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Survey of Patients

INTRODUCTION

Opioids are a valuable tool to help achieve control of pain. However, opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is an important limitation of treatment with this class of drugs.

METHODS

To better understand the impact of OIC on patient-reported outcomes, we carried out a survey involving patients being treated with opioids. Both ad hoc questions and the PROMIS and PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL scores were used.

RESULTS

Of the 597 participants, 150 (25%) had cancer-related pain, and 447 (75%) had non-cancer pain; 66% experienced OIC. PROMIS pain interference questions indicated that pain is more likely to interfere with a patient's life when they have OIC. PAC-QOL and PAC-SYM revealed that 58% of patients with non-cancer pain and OIC reported at least one "severe" or "very severe" constipation symptom, compared to 83% with cancer-related pain. Younger age and less time on opioids were associated with greater impact of OIC on quality of life. Only 41% of patients were satisfied with how their constipation was managed. Over 50% of those with non-cancer pain said that they modified their opioid regimen due to constipation, vs. 6% of those with cancer pain. Constipation had been discussed with the healthcare provider (HCP) in 48% of non-cancer patients and in 73% of cancer patients. In those with chronic pain and OIC, 24% expressed varying degrees of dissatisfaction with the healthcare system, vs. 37% in those with cancer pain and OIC.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide additional evidence that management of OIC is inadequate in many cases. Moreover, they indicate that there is a definite need for better education about OIC among HCPs.

Impact of opioid-induced constipation on opioid substitution therapy management: the patient perspective

Background

Although opioid-induced bowel dysfunction is a well-known and frequent adverse event correlated with opioids, it is scarcely investigated in patients on opioid substitution treatment (OST) and no standard of care is currently available for this population. We aimed to explore the opinion of patients on the impact of constipation on the management of OST and quality of life (QoL).

Methods

We performed a survey that was directed to opioid-dependent patients treated with OST and followed-up in a Service for Addiction Treatment in Italy. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic characteristics, the experience of constipation, general QoL, OST management, interference of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with opioid management, the experience of OIC treatment in the health system, and risk factors for constipation.

Results

Constipation at the moment of the survey (n=105) was reported by 81% of patients and was the most frequent adverse event of OST; 73% of respondents reported at least one severe or very severe symptom of constipation in the last 2 weeks. OIC was reported to hinder adherence to OST by 33% of respondents and 38% of them felt that control of craving had been more difficult since initiation of constipation. Overall, 34% of patients interfered with their OST by changing the schedule on their own in an attempt to improve constipation. Patients were proactive in looking for a solution for constipation but reported poor help from the healthcare system.

Conclusion

Our patient-based survey suggests that careful and efficient management of constipation could increase adherence to OST and improve patient satisfaction and QoL.

Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Cancer Pain in Japan (OIC-J Study): A Post Hoc Analysis

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) can limit the clinical benefit of opioid treatment. This post-hoc analysis evaluated the association between the Rome IV diagnostic criteria and other measures for OIC, including the Bowel Function Index (BFI), correlation between demographics and OIC onset, impact of OIC on pain treatment, and impact of patient–healthcare professional (HCP) communication on patient satisfaction. Patients recorded bowel habits in paper diaries for 14 days following opioid initiation. Study-specific questionnaires were used to evaluate patient awareness of OIC and satisfaction. Patients were ≥20 years old, initiating strong opioid therapy for cancer pain, had an ECOG PS ≤ 2, and had no constipation (≥3 bowel movements within 7 days of enrollment). A total of 220 patients were enrolled. The sensitivity and specificity of BFI for identifying OIC were 81.2% and 54.7%, respectively. Age <65 versus ≥65 years (odds ratio (OR) = 0.510, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.267–0.977) and the presence or absence of comorbidities (OR = 0.443, 95% CI: 0.221–0.885) were correlated with OIC onset. The proportion of inpatients with sustainable pain control at week 2 was similar in patients with or without OIC (60.0% vs. 67.2%, respectively). By patient assessment, there was a significant correlation between an adequate level of patient–HCP communication and satisfaction with OIC treatment (OR = 9.538 (95% CI: 1.577–57.681)). Using BFI to screen for OIC represents a valid approach in patients with cancer pain. Patient–HCP communication is essential for effective management of OIC in patients with cancer pain.

Common Clinical Practice for Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Physician Survey

Background

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) remains an important clinical obstacle despite the availability of several guidelines and pharmacological options for its management. Here, we surveyed common practices and perceptions about OIC among physicians who prescribe opioids in Italy.

Methods

The online survey included 26 questions about OIC. Responses were analyzed descriptively and aggregated by physician specialty.

Results

A total of 501 physicians completed the survey. Most respondents (67%) did not feel adequately educated about OIC despite general consensus regarding interest in the topic. Overall, 62–75% of physicians regularly evaluated intestinal function or OIC symptoms in patients receiving opioid therapy. The most common method for assessment was patient diary; few physicians used a validated instrument such as the Rome IV criteria. Psychiatrists and addiction specialists showed the lowest interest and poorest practices. Most respondents (78%) preferred macrogol prophylaxis followed by macrogol plus another laxative for first-line treatment of OIC symptoms. Peripheral-acting mu opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) were not widely used among physicians; 61% had never prescribed a PAMORA for OIC.

Conclusion

Our findings reveal important differences in clinical practice for OIC across physician specialties. Additional formative efforts are necessary to improve awareness about best practices in OIC.

Opioid-induced Constipation: A Review of Health-related Quality of Life, Patient Burden, Practical Clinical Considerations, and the Impact of Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists

Objective:

The objective of this study was to provide an overview of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and its influence on disease burden and quality of life (QOL).

Methods:

This is a narrative review.

Results:

For many patients, opioid-related side effects, the most common being OIC, have the potential to significantly impair patients’ QOL. Patients with OIC often experience substantial overall burden (ie, increases in anxiety and depression, impairments in activities of daily living, low self-esteem, feelings of embarrassment) and economic burden (ie, higher health care costs, more frequent doctor visits, increased out-of-pocket medication costs), which often causes patients to modify or discontinue opioid treatment despite the analgesic benefits. OIC occurs when opioids bind to peripheral μ-opioid receptors in the gastrointestinal tract. Currently, 4 Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications are available for OIC, 3 of which are peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs). PAMORAs block µ-opioid receptors in the gastrointestinal tract without affecting the central analgesic effects of the opioid and thus provide a targeted approach to OIC management. Two PAMORAs, naldemedine and methylnaltrexone, have shown significant improvements in QOL based on the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms questionnaire relative to placebo. Along with pharmacologic management for OIC, health care providers should institute comprehensive communication strategies with patients to ensure OIC is effectively recognized and managed.

Discussion:

OIC has both physical and psychological impacts on patients. PAMORAs provide effective relief of OIC while also improving QOL. To augment the pharmacologic management of OIC, proactive counseling approaches between physicians and patients may help relieve some of the patient burden associated with OIC and lead to improved outcomes.

Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation and Bowel Dysfunction: Expert Opinion of an Italian Multidisciplinary Panel

The prescribing and use of opioid analgesics is increasing in Italy owing to a profusion in the number and types of opioid analgesic products available, and the increasing prevalence of conditions associated with severe pain, the latter being related to population aging. Herein we provide the expert opinion of an Italian multidisciplinary panel on the management of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and bowel dysfunction. OIC and opioid-induced bowel dysfunction are well-recognised unwanted effects of treatment with opioid analgesics that can profoundly affect quality of life. OIC can be due to additional factors such as reduced mobility, a low-fibre diet, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. Fixed-dose combinations of opioids with mu (μ) opioid receptor antagonists, such as oxycodone/naloxone, have become available, but have limited utility in clinical practice because the individual components cannot be independently titrated, creating a risk of breakthrough pain as the dose is increased. A comprehensive prevention and management strategy for OIC should include interventions that aim to improve fibre and fluid intake, increase mobility or exercise, and restore bowel function without compromising pain control. Recommended first-line pharmacological treatment of OIC is with an osmotic laxative (preferably polyethylene glycol [macrogol]), or a stimulant laxative such as an anthraquinone. A second laxative with a complementary mechanism of action should be added in the event of an inadequate response. Second-line treatment with a peripherally acting μ opioid receptor antagonist (PAMORA), such as methylnaltrexone, naloxegol or naldemedine, should be considered in patients with OIC that has not responded to combination laxative treatment. Prokinetics or intestinal secretagogues, such as lubiprostone, may be appropriate in the third-line setting, but their use in OIC is off-label in Italy, and should therefore be restricted to settings such as specialist centres and clinical trials.

Review article: diagnosis, management and patient perspectives of the spectrum of constipation disorders

BACKGROUND

Chronic constipation is a common, heterogeneous disorder with multiple symptoms and pathophysiological mechanisms. Patients are often referred to a gastroenterology provider after laxatives fail. However, there is limited knowledge of the spectrum and management of constipation disorders.

AIM

To discuss the latest understanding of the spectrum of constipation disorders, tools for identifying a pathophysiologic-based diagnosis in the specialist setting, treatment options and the patient's perspective of constipation.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted using PubMed for constipation diagnostic criteria, diagnostic tools and approved treatments. The authors provided insight from their own practices.

RESULTS

Clinical assessment, stool diaries and Rome IV diagnostic criteria can facilitate diagnosis, evaluate severity and distinguish between IBS with constipation, chronic idiopathic constipation and dyssynergic defecation. Novel smartphone applications can help track constipation symptoms. Rectal examinations, anorectal manometry and balloon expulsion, assessments of neuromuscular function with colonic transit time and colonic manometry can provide mechanistic understanding of underlying pathophysiology. Treatments include lifestyle and diet changes, biofeedback therapy and pharmacological agents. Several classes of laxatives, as well as prokinetic and prosecretory agents, are available; here we describe their mechanisms of action, efficacy and side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Constipation includes multiple overlapping subtypes identifiable using detailed history, current diagnostic tools and smartphone applications. Recognition of individual subtype(s) could pave the way for optimal, evidence-based treatments by a gastroenterology provider.

Personalizing Cancer Pain Therapy: Insights from the Rational Use of Analgesics (RUA) Group

Introduction

A previous Delphi survey from the Rational Use of Analgesics (RUA) project involving Italian palliative care specialists revealed some discrepancies between current guidelines and clinical practice with a lack of consensus on items regarding the use of strong opioids in treating cancer pain. Those results represented the basis for a new Delphi study addressing a better approach to pain treatment in patients with cancer.

Methods

The study consisted of a two-round multidisciplinary Delphi study. Specialists rated their agreement with a set of 17 statements using a 5-point Likert scale (0 = totally disagree and 4 = totally agree). Consensus on a statement was achieved if the median consensus score (MCS) (expressed as value at which at least 50% of participants agreed) was at least 4 and the interquartile range (IQR) was 3–4.

Results

This survey included input from 186 palliative care specialists representing all Italian territory. Consensus was reached on seven statements. More than 70% of participants agreed with the use of low dose of strong opioids in moderate pain treatment and valued transdermal route as an effective option when the oral route is not available. There was strong consensus on the importance of knowing opioid pharmacokinetics for therapy personalization and on identifying immediate-release opioids as key for tailoring therapy to patients’ needs. Limited agreement was reached on items regarding breakthrough pain and the management of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction.

Conclusion

These findings may assist clinicians in applying clinical evidence to routine care settings and call for a reappraisal of current pain treatment recommendations with the final aim of optimizing the clinical use of strong opioids in patients with cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00248-x.

Healthcare Professionals' Experiences of Assessing, Treating and Preventing Constipation Among Older Patients During Hospitalization: An Interview Study

PURPOSE

Constipation is a common and troublesome condition among older patients and can result in a variety of negative health consequences. It is often undiagnosed or undertreated. Healthcare professionals have a responsibility to understand and address patients' overall healthcare needs; so exploring their experiences is, therefore, highly relevant. The purpose of the study was to explore healthcare professionals' experiences of assessing, treating and preventing constipation among older patients.

METHODS

A qualitative design with an exploratory approach was used. The participants (registered nurses and physicians) were purposively sampled from three wards in a geriatric department in a medium-sized hospital in Sweden. Data were collected through focus group discussions and individual interviews, and analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Three categories were generated: Reasons for suboptimal management of constipation, Strategies for management, and Approaching the patients' needs. In the care of older patients at risk of or with constipation, decisions were made based on personal knowledge, personal experience and clinical reasoning. A person-centered approach was highlighted but was not always possible to incorporate.

CONCLUSION

Different strategies for preventing and treating constipation were believed to be important, as was person-centered care, but were found to be challenging in the complexity of the care situation. It is important that healthcare professionals reflect on their own knowledge and clinical practice. There is a need for more support, information and specific guidance for healthcare professionals caring for older patients during hospitalization. Overall, this study underscores the importance of adequate access to resources and education in constipation management and that clinical guidelines, such as the Swedish Handbook for Healthcare, could be used as a guide for delivering high-quality care in hospitals.

What to Do and What Not to Do in the Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Choosing Wisely Report

Introduction

Despite the essential utility of opioids for the clinical management of pain, opioid-induced constipation (OIC) remains an important obstacle in clinical practice. In patients, OIC hinders treatment compliance and has negative effects on quality of life. From a clinician perspective, the diagnosis and management of OIC are hampered by the absence of a clear, universal diagnostic definition across disciplines and a lack of standardization in OIC treatment and assessment.

Methods

A multidisciplinary panel of physician experts who treat OIC was assembled to identify a list of ten corrective actions—five “things to do” and five “things not to do”—for the diagnosis and management of OIC, utilizing the Choosing Wisely methodology.

Results

The final list of corrective actions to improve the diagnosis and clinical management of OIC emphasized a need for: (i) better physician and patient education regarding OIC; (ii) systematic use of diagnostically validated approaches to OIC diagnosis and assessment (i.e., Rome IV criteria and Bristol Stool Scale, respectively) across various medical contexts; and (iii) awareness about appropriate, evidence-based treatments for OIC including available peripheral mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs).

Conclusions

Physicians who prescribe long-term opioids should be forthcoming with patients about the possibility of OIC and be adequately versed in the most recent guideline recommendations for its management.

Association between opioid usage and rectal dysfunction in constipation: A cross-sectional study of 2754 patients

BACKGROUND

Opioid use has reached epidemic proportions. In contrast to the known effect of opioids on gut transit, the effect on rectal sensorimotor function has not been comprehensively investigated.

METHODS

Cross-sectional (hypothesis-generating) study of anorectal physiology studies in 2754 adult patients referred to a tertiary unit (2004-2016) for investigation of functional constipation (defined by "derived" Rome IV core criteria). Statistical associations between opioid usage, symptoms, and anorectal physiological variables were investigated. Opioids were sub-classified as prescriptions for mild-moderate or moderate-severe pain.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 2354 patients (85.5%) were classified as non-opioid users, 162 (5.9%) as opioid users for mild-moderate pain, and 238 (8.6%) for moderate-severe pain. Opioids for moderate-severe pain were associated with increased symptomatic severity (Cleveland Clinic constipation score 18.5 vs 15.1; mean difference 2.9 [95%-CI 2.3-3.6]; P < .001), rectal hyposensitivity (odds ratio 1.74 [95%-CI 1.23-2.46]; P = .002), functional evacuation disorders (odds ratio 1.73 [95%-CI 1.28-2.34]; P < .001), and delayed whole-gut transit (odds ratio 1.68 [95%-CI 1.19-2.37]; P = .003). Differences in anorectal variables between opioid users for mild-moderate pain and non-opioid users were not statistically significant. Hierarchical opioid use (non vs mild-moderate vs moderate-severe) was associated with decreasing proportions of patients with no physiological abnormality on testing (40.2% vs 38.1% vs 29.2%) and increasing proportions with both delayed whole-gut transit and rectal sensorimotor dysfunction (16.6% vs 17.5% vs 28.5%).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Opioid use is over-represented in patients referred for investigation of constipation. Opioids for moderate-severe pain are associated with rectal sensorimotor abnormalities. Further studies are required to determine whether this association indicates causation.

Naldemedine: A New Option for OIBD

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) is a common complication in long-term opioid users and abusers. It is a burdensome condition, which significantly limits quality of life and is associated with increasing health costs. OIBD affects up to 60% of patients with chronic non-cancer pain and over 80% of patients suffering from cancer pain and is one of the conditions of the most common symptoms associated with opioid maintenance. Given the continued use of opioids for chronic pain management in appropriate patients, OIBD is likely to persist in clinical practice in the coming years. We will herein review its underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the available treatments. In the last years, pharmaceutical research has focused on the opportunity of targeting peripheral mu-opioid receptors without affecting their analgesic activity in the central nervous system, and several peripherally acting mu-opioid receptors antagonists (PAMORAs) drugs have been approved. We will mainly focus on naldemedine, discussing its pharmacological properties, its clinical efficacy and side effects. Head-to-head comparisons between naldemedine and the other PAMORAs are not available yet, but some considerations will be discussed based on the pharmacological and clinical data. As a whole, the available data suggest that naldemedine is a valid treatment option for OIBD, as it is a well-tolerated drug that alleviates constipation without affecting analgesia or causing symptoms of opioid withdrawal.

Patients' Self-Assessment of the Symptoms and Impact of Opioid-Induced Constipation: Results From a Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Japanese Patients With Cancer

CONTEXT

Many patients who have cancer consider opioid-induced constipation (OIC) to be a burdensome side effect of opioid treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes in Japanese patients with cancer pain and OIC.

METHODS

This prospective observational study evaluated OIC incidence for two weeks in patients with cancer after they initiated strong opioid therapy. Rome IV diagnostic criteria, a physician's diagnosis, spontaneous bowel movements, Bowel Function Index score, and patients' daily self-assessments were used. Changes from baseline in Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms and Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) scores were compared between patients with and without OIC. Patients and health care providers (HCPs) completed study-specific questionnaires regarding OIC burden, treatment satisfaction, and patient-provider communications.

RESULTS

Among 212 enrolled patients, the incidence of OIC was 47.6% by patients' self-assessments, with a cumulative incidence of 30.2% by Day 3 and 43.5% by Day 7. Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms and PAC-QOL overall scores from patients with OIC worsened significantly from baseline compared with patients without OIC by all diagnostic criteria, except for spontaneous bowel movement frequency for PAC-QOL. Patients and HCPs were generally satisfied with OIC treatment; however, 53.5% of patients and approximately 40.0% of HCPs reported that OIC affected pain management. Most patients and HCPs reported that OIC conditions were sufficiently or essentially communicated.

CONCLUSION

After starting opioid therapy, patients recognized OIC onset and its impact on cancer pain management, highlighting the need for effective patient-provider communications, diagnosis, and treatment of OIC to improve QOL for patients with cancer receiving opioid analgesics.

Ambulatory assessment of colonic motility using the electromagnetic capsule tracking system: Effect of opioids

BACKGROUND

Opioid treatment often causes debilitating constipation. However, it is not well described how opioids affect colonic motility and whether opioid-induced constipation is due to either a decrease of powerful peristaltic contractions or "uncoordinated" peristalsis. The present study aims to investigate the effect of oxycodone on parameters of colonic motility and to determine whether motility is normalized by the opioid antagonist naloxegol.

METHODS

In two randomized, double-blind crossover trials, oxycodone or placebo was administered to 25 healthy males (Trial A), while another 24 healthy males were administered oxycodone with naloxegol or placebo (Trial B). Colonic motility was assessed by tracking the progression of an electromagnetic capsule throughout the large intestine. Segmental colonic transit times and capsule movements were calculated using displacement distance and velocity.

KEY RESULTS

In Trial A, colonic transit time increased during oxycodone treatment compared with placebo (39 vs 18 hours, P < .01). Displacement during long fast antegrade movements was shorter during oxycodone treatment than with placebo (10 vs 20 cm, P = .03). In Trial B, colonic transit time was faster during oxycodone + naloxegol than during oxycodone + placebo (40 vs 55 hours, P = .049), mainly caused by an increase of the percentwise fraction of distance covered by fast movements in the left colon (P = .001).

CONCLUSION & INFERENCES

Oxycodone treatment impaired colonic motility, manifested as increased transit time, specifically decreased long fast antegrade movements, and addition of naloxegol improved motility dynamics. In humans, the increased transit time during opioid treatment is caused by a decrease in long fast movements rather than uncoordinated peristalsis.

Is Dyssynergic Defecation an Unrecognized Cause of Chronic Constipation in Patients Using Opioids?

OBJECTIVES

The impact of opioids on anorectal function is poorly understood but potentially relevant to the pathogenesis of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). To evaluate anorectal function testing (AFT) characteristics, symptom burden, and quality of life in chronically constipated patients prescribed an opioid (OIC) in comparison with constipated patients who are not on an opioid (NOIC).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on 3,452 (OIC = 588 and NOIC = 2,864) chronically constipated patients (Rome 3) who completed AFT. AFT variables included anal sphincter pressure and response during simulated defecation, balloon expulsion test (BET), and rectal sensation. Dyssynergic defecation (DD) was defined as an inability to relax the anal sphincter during simulated defecation and an abnormal BET. Patients completed Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) and Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) questionnaires.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study cohort was 49 years. Most patients were women (82%) and whites (83%). Patients with OIC were older than NOIC patients (50.7 vs 48.3, P = 0.001). OIC patients were significantly more likely to have DD (28.6% vs 21.4%, P < 0.001), an abnormal simulated defecation response on anorectal manometry (59% vs 43.8%, P < 0.001), and an abnormal BET (48% vs 42.5%, P = 0.02) than NOIC patients. OIC patients reported more severe constipation symptoms (P < 0.02) and worse quality of life (P < 0.05) than NOIC patients.

DISCUSSION

Chronically constipated patients who use opioids are more likely to have DD and more severe constipation symptoms than NOIC.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for opioid-induced constipation: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pain is very common and its management with a huge burden for patients and the healthcare system. And the network meta-analysis was designed to provide reference for the clinical practice.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, CNKI, VIP, Wan Fang, and CBM will be systematically searched their inception to November 2018. Randomized controlled trials that compared the effect of differently pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatments for opioid-induced constipation will be included. The primary outcome is the efficacy of therapeutic regimens. Risk of bias assessment of the included studies will be performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A network meta-analysis will be performed using STATA 13.0 software with WinBUGS 1.4.3 software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation will be used to assess the overall quality of evidence.

RESULTS

This study is ongoing and will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide a comprehensive evidence on the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for opioid-induced constipation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018116533.