Treatment of Pain in Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: is Methadone More Effective?
NCT ID: NCT01317589
Last Updated: 2015-07-16
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
134 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2011-05-31
2015-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Treatment of Pain in Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients:
is methadone more effective than fentanyl?
Pain is a prevalent symptom in patients with cancer. A neuropathic component is seen in one third of the patients. In patients with head-and-neck cancer neuropathic pain is far more prevalent than in a general cancer population: 46-64%. Treatment of neuropathic pain is complex and available treatment modalities achieve (partial) pain relief in only 40-60% of patients. The N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor (NMDAR) plays a central role in the mediation of neuropathic pain. NMDAR blockers could be a new approach to treat neuropathic pain in patients with cancer.
Methadone is a strong opioid but at the same time significant non-competitive NMDA-receptor antagonist qualities have been described. Many small studies and case-reports describe the successful rotation from different strong opioids to methadone. There are no studies that selected patients with (predominantly) neuropathic pain to be treated with methadone, whereas this group of patients is expected to profit from the NMDAR-antagonist properties of methadone.
Objective of the study:
This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to investigate whether addition of a NMDAR-antagonist to a strong opioid (methadone) is superior in the treatment of predominantly neuropathic pain over a strong opioid alone (fentanyl) in terms of pain relief and time to achieve significant pain relief.
Study design:
Open label randomised controlled trial
Study population:
opioid naïve patients with histological proven head-and-neck cancer and (partly) neuropathic pain with a NRS score of ≥ 4, age =/\> 18 years
Intervention Treatment with methadone or fentanyl patch
Primary study parameters/outcome of the study:
Is methadone more effective than fentanyl in the treatment of pain in patients with head-and-neck cancer with respect to
1. significant pain relief (reduction of Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) of 50%) and
2. pain interference
Secondary study parameters/outcome of the study:
Is methadone superior to fentanyl in the treatment of pain in patients with head-and-neck cancer with respect to
1. time to achieve significant pain relief
2. side-effect profile?
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Methadone Associated With Morphine for Cancer Pain
NCT03324815
Long-term Effects of Methadone for Cancer Pain
NCT02856399
Pain: Screen and Treat
NCT01716780
Methadone Versus Morphine for Cancer-Related Pain
NCT00573937
Morphine Versus Methadone As First Line Strong Opioid for Cancer Pain
NCT00634010
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
T= -1: - informed consent
* sort of pain (DN4)
* randomisation
T = 0 - questionnaire 1: demographic variables, disease specific variables, BPI, side effect questions, HADS, QoL
* explain and provide the pain sheet
* start methadone 2 x 2,5 mg or fentanyl patch 12 μg/uur
* breakthrough medication: 50 µg fentanyl nose spray or fentanyl stick 400 µg till 6x/day
T=1 - questionnaire 2: BPI, side effect questions, global perceived effect
1 week - review pain sheet on pain and total rescue doses
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
T=2 - questionnaire 2: BPI, side effect questions, global perceived effect 3 weeks - review pain sheet on pain and total rescue doses
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T=3 - questionnaire 2: BPI, side effect questions, global perceived effect 5 weeks - review pain sheet on pain and total rescue doses
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T = 4 - questionnaire 3: BPI, side effect questions, global perceived effect, QoL
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SINGLE_GROUP
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
fentanyl
active pain treatment with fentanyl patch
fentanyl
T = 0
* start methadone 2 x 2,5 mg or fentanyl patch 12 μg/uur
* breakthrough medication: 50 µg fentanyl nose spray or fentanyl stick 400 µg till 6x/day
T=1
1 week
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
T=2 3 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T=3 5 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T = 4 9 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
methadone
active pain treatment with methadone
methadone
T = 0
* start methadone 2 x 2,5 mg or fentanyl patch 12 μg/uur
* breakthrough medication: 50 µg fentanyl nose spray or fentanyl stick 400 µg till 6x/day
T=1
1 week
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
T=2 3 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T=3 5 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T = 4 9 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
fentanyl
T = 0
* start methadone 2 x 2,5 mg or fentanyl patch 12 μg/uur
* breakthrough medication: 50 µg fentanyl nose spray or fentanyl stick 400 µg till 6x/day
T=1
1 week
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
T=2 3 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T=3 5 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T = 4 9 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
methadone
T = 0
* start methadone 2 x 2,5 mg or fentanyl patch 12 μg/uur
* breakthrough medication: 50 µg fentanyl nose spray or fentanyl stick 400 µg till 6x/day
T=1
1 week
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
T=2 3 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T=3 5 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
T = 4 9 weeks
* if necessary increase dose strong opioid with 50%
* if necessary decrease dose strong opioid with 30%
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* not being able to read or fill in the questionnaires
* recent operation (less than 7 days)
* women of childbearing potential not using contraception
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Maastricht University Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Maarten van Kleef, MD, PhD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Maastricht University Medical Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University Hospital Maastricht
Maastricht, , Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
METC 11-2-007
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.