Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Meloxicam in Subjects With Moderate-to-Severe Pain After Open Abdominal Hysterectomy: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Bioequivalence of Meloxicam Nanocrystal Injection in Healthy Chinese Volunteers

This single-center, randomized, open, two-preparation, single-dose, two-period, self-crossover trial aimed to assess the bioequivalence and safety of the test (T) preparation compared to the reference (R) preparation following intravenous injection in healthy subjects under fasting conditions. Twenty-four healthy subjects were enrolled in the study and subjects were randomly divided into two groups at a 1:1 ratio and were administered once per period, with an 8-day washout period. During each period, serum drug concentrations were detected for pharmacokinetic analysis and adverse events were recorded for safety analysis. The 90% confidence intervals for the geometric mean ratios (T:R) of maximum serum concentration, area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable concentration, and area under the serum concentration-time curve from time zero to infinite time fell within the predefined bioequivalence range of 80%-125%, indicating bioequivalence between the T and R preparation under fasting conditions. Additionally, four subjects (16.7%) experienced five instances of adverse events in the T group, while five subjects (21.7%) experienced five instances of adverse events in the R group. This trial indicated the potential bioequivalence between the T and R products under fasting conditions, based on pharmacokinetic and safety profile.

Preemptive QP001, a fast-acting meloxicam formulation, provides analgesia and reduces opioid consumption following abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

QP001, a novel meloxicam formulation, has been developed to manage moderate to severe postoperative pain. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of QP001 injections for moderate to severe pain following abdominal surgery.

METHOD

This prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial enlisted patients experiencing moderate to severe pain following abdominal surgery. These patients were randomized to receive either QP001 injections (30 mg or 60 mg) or a placebo pre-surgery. The primary efficacy endpoint was the total morphine consumption within 24 h after the first administration.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients were enrolled, and 106 patients completed the study. The total morphine consumption in the QP001 30 mg group and 60 mg group, versus placebo group, were significantly lower over the following 24 h (5.11[5.46] vs 8.86[7.67], P = 0.011; 3.11[3.08] vs 8.86[7.67], P < 0.001), respectively. The total morphine consumption in the QP001 30 mg and 60 mg groups, versus placebo group, was also significantly decreased over the following 48 h, including the 24-48 h period (P ≤ 0.001). The QP001 30 mg and 60 mg groups, versus placebo, showed a significant decrease in the area under the curve for pain intensity-time as well as a significant decrease in the effective pressing times of the analgesic pump over the 24 h and 48 h periods (P < 0.05). The QP001 groups, versus placebo, show no significant different in Adverse Events or Adverse Drug Reactions (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative/preemptive QP001 provides analgesia and reduces opioid consumption in patients with moderate to severe pain following abdominal surgery, while maintaining a favorable safety profile.

Positive Association between Peri-Surgical Opioid Exposure and Post-Discharge Opioid-Related Outcomes

Background: Multiple studies have investigated the epidemic of persistent opioid use as a common postsurgical complication. However, there exists a knowledge gap in the association between the level of opioid exposure in the peri-surgical setting and post-discharge adverse outcomes to patients and healthcare settings. We analyzed the association between peri-surgical opioid exposure use and post-discharge outcomes, including persistent postsurgical opioid prescription, opioid-related symptoms (ORS), and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Methods: A retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing cesarean delivery, hysterectomy, spine surgery, total hip arthroplasty, or total knee arthroplasty in an academic healthcare system between January 2015 and June 2018. Peri-surgical opioid exposure was converted into morphine milligram equivalents (MME), then grouped into two categories: high (>median MME of each surgery cohort) or low (≤median MME of each surgery cohort) MME groups. The rates of persistent opioid use 30 and 90 days after discharge were compared using logistic regression. Secondary outcomes, including ORS and HCRU during the 180-day follow-up, were descriptively compared between the high and low MME groups. Results: The odds ratios (95% CI) of high vs. low MME for persistent opioid use after 30 and 90 days of discharge were 1.38 (1.24−1.54) and 1.41 (1.24−1.61), respectively. The proportion of patients with one or more ORS diagnoses was greater among the high-MME group than the low-MME group (27.2% vs. 21.2%, p < 0.01). High vs. low MME was positively associated with the rate of inpatient admission, emergency department admissions, and outpatient visits. Conclusions: Greater peri-surgical opioid exposure correlates with a statistically and clinically significant increase in post-discharge adverse opioid-related outcomes. The study findings warrant intensive monitoring for patients receiving greater peri-surgical opioid exposure.

Budget Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Intravenous Meloxicam to Treat Moderate-Severe Postoperative Pain

INTRODUCTION

This study assesses the budget impact and cost-effectiveness of intravenous meloxicam (MIV) to treat moderate-severe acute postoperative pain in adults.

METHODS

A two-part Markov cohort model captured the pharmacoeconomic impact of MIV versus non-opioid intravenous analgesics (acetaminophen, ibuprofen, ketorolac) among a hypothetical adult cohort undergoing selected inpatient procedures and experiencing moderate-severe acute postoperative pain: Part 1 (postoperative hour 0 to discharge, cycled hourly), health states were defined by pain level. Pain transition rates, adverse event probabilities, and concomitant opioid utilization were derived from a network meta-analysis. Part 2 (discharge to week 52, cycled weekly), health states were defined by the presence/absence of pain-related readmission and opioid use disorder as determined by literature-based inputs relating to pain control outcomes. Healthcare utilization and direct medical costs were derived from an administrative claims database analysis. Primary outcomes were the incremental cost per member per month (PMPM) and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Scenario, univariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The model assumed a private payer perspective in the USA (no discounting, 2019 US$).

RESULTS

Modeled outcomes indicated MIV was associated with lower accumulated postoperative pain, fewer adverse events, and less opioid utilization for most procedures and comparators, with longer-term outcomes also generally favoring MIV. The budget impact of MIV was - $0.028 PMPM. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, MIV had lower costs and better outcomes for all comparisons except against ketorolac in orthopedic procedures where the former was cost-effective but not cost saving ($95,925/QALY). Scenario and sensitivity analyses indicated that modeled outcomes were robust to alternative inputs and underlying input uncertainty. Differences in direct medical costs were driven by reduced costs attributable to length of stay and opioid-related adverse drug events.

CONCLUSION

MIV was associated with modeled clinical and economic benefits compared to commonly used non-opioid intravenous analgesics.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of postsurgical pain

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pain is a distressful experience and remains to be a significant concern after surgery. Current agents either fail to prevent or minimize postoperative pain or cause a series of adverse effects, addiction, or abuse. Opioids have been the gold standard in the treatment of postoperative pain despite their well-described adverse effects. Many new agents with different mechanisms of action have been recently introduced to address this issue.

AREAS COVERED

This current review summarizes the list of new and emerging drugs investigated for their efficacy in controlling the postoperative pain and decreasing the need for rescue opioid use, adverse effect profile, abuse, and addiction potential.

EXPERT OPINION

Opioids have unrivaled analgesic efficacy. However adverse effects of opioids led to the search for better options. In mild pain most of the emerging drugs have been shown to control postoperative pain and decrease the use of rescue opioid, however fail to control pain after major surgeries causing severe pain. Specific agents such as Oliceridine, new local anesthetics, etc., are effective in controlling severe pain and hold a promise to replace opioids in the near future.

Safety and Efficacy of Perioperative Intravenous Meloxicam for Moderate-to-Severe Pain Management in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective

To evaluate the effect of perioperative meloxicam IV 30 mg on opioid consumption in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Design

Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Subjects

In total, 181 adults undergoing elective primary TKA.

Methods

Subjects received meloxicam 30 mg or placebo via an IV bolus every 24 hours, the first dose administered prior to surgery as part of a multimodal pain management protocol. The primary efficacy parameter was total opioid use from end of surgery through 24 hours.

Results

Meloxicam IV was associated with less opioid use versus placebo during the 24 hours after surgery (18.9 ± 1.32 vs 27.7 ± 1.37 mg IV morphine equivalent dose; P < 0.001) and was superior to placebo on secondary endpoints, including summed pain intensity (first dose to 24 hours postdosing, first dose to first assisted ambulation, and first dose to discharge) and opioid use (48–72 hrs., 0–48 hrs., 0–72 hrs., hour 0 to end of treatment, and the first 24 hours after discharge). Adverse events (AEs) were reported for 69.9% and 92.0% of the meloxicam IV and placebo groups, respectively; the most common AEs were nausea (40% vs. 59%), vomiting (16% vs 22%), hypotension (14% vs 15%), pruritus (15% vs 11%), and constipation (11% vs 13%).

Conclusions

Perioperative meloxicam IV 30 mg as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for elective primary TKA reduced opioid consumption in the 24-hour period after surgery versus placebo and was associated with a lower incidence of AEs typically associated with opioid use.

Meloxicam for intravenous use: review of its clinical efficacy and safety for management of postoperative pain

Meloxicam for intravenous use (meloxicam iv.) is a nanocrystal formulation with improved dissolution properties and shortened time to peak plasma concentrations versus oral meloxicam. In Phase III and IIIb trials, 30 mg once daily relieved pain following pre- or postoperative administration in orthopedic, abdominal and colorectal surgeries. Meloxicam iv. was associated with reduced opioid consumption, the clinical benefit of which remains unclear. The drug may be administered alone or in combination with other non-nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In Phase III trials, it demonstrated adverse event profile similar to placebo, with nausea, constipation, vomiting and headache occurring most frequently. Meloxicam iv. does not appear to adversely affect platelet function or wound-healing parameters. No new safety signals were detected in the Phase IIIb studies.

Efficacy of non-opioid analgesics to control postoperative pain: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) Meloxicam 30 mg (MIV), an investigational non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), and certain other IV non-opioid analgesics for moderate-severe acute postoperative pain.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and CENTRAL for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) (years 2000-2019, adult human subjects) of IV non-opioid analgesics (IV NSAIDs or IV Acetaminophen) used to treat acute pain after abdominal, hysterectomy, bunionectomy or orthopedic procedures. A Bayesian NMA was conducted in R to rank treatments based on the standardized mean differences in sum of pain intensity difference from baseline up to 24 h postoperatively (sum of pain intensity difference: SPID 24). The probability and the cumulative probability of rank for each treatment were calculated, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was applied to distinguish treatments on the basis of their outcomes such that higher SUCRA values indicate better outcomes. The study protocol was prospectively registered with by PROSPERO (CRD42019117360).

RESULTS

Out of 2313 screened studies, 27 studies with 36 comparative observations were included, producing a treatment network that included the four non-opioid IV pain medications of interest (MIV, ketorolac, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen). MIV was associated with the largest SPID 24 for all procedure categories and comparators. The SUCRA ranking table indicated that MIV had the highest probability for the most effective treatment for abdominal (89.5%), bunionectomy (100%), and hysterectomy (99.8%). MIV was associated with significantly less MME utilization versus all comparators for abdominal procedures, hysterectomy, and versus acetaminophen in orthopedic procedures. Elsewhere MME utilization outcomes for MIV were largely equivalent or nominally better than other comparators. Odds of ORADEs were significantly higher for all comparators vs MIV for orthopedic (gastrointestinal) and hysterectomy (respiratory).

CONCLUSIONS

MIV 30 mg may provide better pain reduction with similar or better safety compared to other approved IV non-opioid analgesics. Caution is warranted in interpreting these results as all comparisons involving MIV were indirect.

Preoperative intravenous meloxicam for moderate-to-severe pain in the immediate post-operative period: a Phase IIIb randomized clinical trial in 55 patients undergoing primary open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery with bowel resection and/or anastomosis

Aim: Evaluate safety/efficacy of intravenous meloxicam in a colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. Methods: Adults undergoing primary open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery with bowel resection and/or anastomosis received meloxicam IV 30 mg (n = 27) or placebo (n = 28) once daily beginning 30 min before surgery. Results: Adverse events: meloxicam IV, 85%; placebo, 93%. Adverse events commonly associated with opioids: 41 versus 61% - including nausea (33 vs 50%), vomiting (19 vs 18%) and ileus (4 vs 18%). Wound healing satisfaction scores (physician-rated), clinical laboratory findings and vital signs were similar in both groups. No anastomotic leaks were reported. Opioid consumption, postoperative pain intensity, length of stay and times to first bowel sound, first flatus and first bowel movement were significantly lower with meloxicam IV versus placebo. Most subjects (>92%) were satisfied with postoperative pain medication. Conclusion: Meloxicam IV was generally well tolerated and associated with decreased opioid consumption, lower resource utilization and functional benefits. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03323385 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Meloxicam Intravenous Injection

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are available online to subscribers. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, contact Wolters Kluwer customer service at 866-397-3433.

Platelet Function: Meloxicam Intravenous in Whole Blood Samples From Healthy Volunteers

Nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective treatments for pain but may induce bleeding events due to platelet dysfunction associated with inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)‐1 impairing thromboxane production. An intravenous nanocrystal formulation of meloxicam, a COX‐2 preferential nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug, is under development for the treatment of moderate to severe pain. This single‐center ex vivo study evaluated the effect of meloxicam intravenous and ketorolac on platelet function in whole blood samples from healthy volunteers. Each whole blood sample was aliquoted to allow analysis using a platelet function analyzer under negative control (untreated), positive control (2 therapeutic ketorolac concentrations), and meloxicam intravenous (1 therapeutic, 3 supratherapeutic concentrations) using both collagen with epinephrine and collagen with adenosine diphosphate reagent cartridges. The platelet function analyzer determines closure time by simulating platelet adhesion and aggregation following vascular injury. The final analysis set included data from 8 subjects. The collagen with adenosine diphosphate analysis (sensitive to thrombocytopathies) showed no significant differences in closure time for meloxicam‐ or ketorolac‐treated samples and untreated control. The collagen with epinephrine analysis (sensitive to aspirin‐induced platelet abnormalities) produced no significant difference in closure time between any meloxicam concentration and untreated control. Ketorolac was associated with significantly longer closure times vs untreated control at both the 2.5‐ and 5‐µg/mL concentrations (P = .003 and .0257, respectively) and vs meloxicam at several concentrations. Similar results were observed when all analyzed samples were included. Meloxicam intravenous had no significant effect on closure times at therapeutic or supratherapeutic concentrations in this ex vivo study.

Safety, Tolerability, and Effect on Opioid Use of Meloxicam IV Following Orthopedic Surgery

Objective

A Phase 3 randomized multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT02720692) compared once-daily intravenous (IV) meloxicam 30 mg to placebo, when added to the standard of care pain management regimens, in adults with moderate-to-severe pain following major elective surgery and concluded that meloxicam IV had a safety profile similar to placebo and reduced opioid consumption.

Methods

In this post hoc subgroup analysis of orthopedic surgery subjects, 379 subjects received meloxicam IV 30 mg or IV-administered placebo every 24 hrs for ≤7 doses. Safety was assessed via AEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, and ECG, with an emphasis on specific AEs, including injection site reactions, bleeding, cardiovascular, hepatic, renal, thrombotic, and wound healing events. Daily opioid consumption was assessed during treatment.

Results

Among meloxicam IV-treated subjects, 64.7% experienced ≥1 AE versus 68.8% of placebo-treated subjects. Investigators assessed most AEs to be mild or moderate in intensity and unrelated to treatment. Total opioid consumption (36.8 mg versus 50.3 mg IV morphine equivalent dose; P=0.0081) and opioid consumption during time points 0‒24, 24‒48, 0‒48, and 0‒72 hrs were statistically significantly lower in the meloxicam IV group.

Conclusion

Meloxicam IV demonstrated no significant differences in the number and frequency of AEs versus placebo in subjects following orthopedic surgery. Opioid consumption was reduced in the meloxicam IV group versus placebo.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02720692).

A Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Evaluation of the Safety of Intravenous Meloxicam Following Major Surgery

An intravenous (IV) formulation of meloxicam is being studied for moderate to severe pain management. This phase 3, randomized, multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial evaluated the safety of once‐daily meloxicam IV 30 mg in subjects following major elective surgery. Eligible subjects were randomized (3:1) to receive meloxicam IV 30 mg or placebo administered once daily. Safety was evaluated via adverse events, clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, wound healing, and opioid consumption. The incidence of adverse events was similar between meloxicam IV– and placebo‐treated subjects (63.0% versus 65.0%). Investigators assessed most adverse events as mild or moderate in intensity and unrelated to treatment. Adverse events of interest (injection‐site reactions, bleeding, cardiovascular, hepatic, renal, thrombotic, and wound‐healing events) were similar between groups. Over the treatment period, meloxicam IV was associated with a 23.6% (P = .0531) reduction in total opioid use (9.2 mg morphine equivalent) compared to placebo‐treated subjects. The results suggest that meloxicam IV had a safety profile similar to that of placebo with respect to numbers and frequencies of adverse events and reduced opioid consumption in subjects with moderate to severe postoperative pain following major elective surgery.

Intravenous meloxicam for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain: a pooled analysis of safety and opioid-reducing effects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To describe the safety and tolerability of intravenous meloxicam compared with placebo across all phase II/III clinical trials.

METHODS

Safety data and opioid use from subjects with moderate to severe postoperative pain who received ≥1 dose of intravenous meloxicam (5-60 mg) or placebo in 1 of 7 studies (4 phase II; 3 phase III) were pooled. Data from intravenous meloxicam 5 mg, 7.5 mg and 15 mg groups were combined (low-dose subset).

RESULTS

A total of 1426 adults (86.6% white; mean age: 45.8 years) received ≥1 dose of meloxicam IV; 517 (77.6% white; mean age: 46.7 years) received placebo. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in intravenous meloxicam and placebo-treated subjects was 47% and 57%, respectively. The most commonly reported TEAEs across treatment groups (intravenous meloxicam 5-15 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg and placebo, respectively) were nausea (4.3%, 20.8%, 5.8% and 25.3%), headache (1.5%, 5.6%, 1.6% and 10.4%), vomiting (2.8%, 4.6%, 1.6% and 7.4%) and dizziness (0%, 3.5%, 1.1% and 4.8%). TEAE incidence was generally similar in subjects aged >65 years with impaired renal function and the general population. Similar rates of cardiovascular events were reported between treatment groups. One death was reported (placebo group; unrelated to study drug). There were 35 serious adverse events (SAEs); intravenous meloxicam 15 mg (n=5), intravenous meloxicam 30 mg (n=15) and placebo (n=15). The SAEs in meloxicam-treated subjects were determined to be unrelated to study medication. Six subjects withdrew due to TEAEs, including three treated with intravenous meloxicam (rash, localized edema and postprocedural pulmonary embolism). In trials where opioid use was monitored, meloxicam reduced postoperative rescue opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous meloxicam was generally well tolerated in subjects with moderate to severe postoperative pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT01436032, NCT00945763, NCT01084161, NCT02540265, NCT02678286, NCT02675907 and NCT02720692.