4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

An open-label, multi-dose efficacy and safety study of intramuscular tetrodotoxin in patients with severe cancer-related pain

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 171-182

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.11.008

关键词

clinical trial; cancer pain; analgesic; letrodotoxin; safety; efficacy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cancer pain is a prevalent and serious public health issue, and more effective treatments are needed. This study evaluates the analgesic activity of tetrodotoxin, a highly selective sodium channel blocker, in cancer pain. A Phase IIa, open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation study of intramuscular tetrodotoxin was conducted in patients with severe, unrelieved cancer pain. The study design called for six ascending dose levels of intramuscular tetrodotoxin, administered over a four-day treatment period in hospitalized patients, with six patients to be enrolled within each successive dose level. Twenty-four patients underwent 31 courses of treatment at doses ranging from 13 to 90 mu g daily, administered in divided doses, over four days. Most patients described transient perioral tingling or outer mild sensory phenomena within about an hour of each treatment. Nausea and other toxicities were generally mild, but two patients experienced a serious adverse event, truncal anal gait ataxia, that resolved over loss. Seventeen of 31 treatments resulted in clinically meaningful reductions in pain intensity, and relief of pain persisted for up to two weeks or longer. Two patients had opioids held due to narcosis concurrent with relief of pain. Somatic, visceral, or neuropathic pain could all respond, but it was not, possible to predict which patients were more likely to have an analgesic effect. Tetrodotoxin was overall safe. It effectively relieved severe, treatment-resistant cancer pain in the majority of patients and often for prolonged periods after treatment. It may have a novel mechanism of analgesic effect. Further study is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据