tapentadol and Cancer-Pain

Tapentadol is the first of a new class of analgesics, having synergistic µ-opioid receptor agonist and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitory actions. It has been widely researched in many areas of pain, often in noninferiority studies against potent opioids. This review describes all randomized and recent nonrandomized studies of tapentadol in adults with cancer pain.. Tapentadol has been shown to be at least as effective as morphine and oxycodone in five randomized (two of which were multicenter and double-blind) and a range of nonrandomized trials, although caution is needed when interpreting these results. It is effective in both opioid-naive patients and those already taking opioids. By having a lower µ-opioid receptor binding affinity, it has fewer opioid-related toxicities such as constipation and nausea. A recent randomized trial comparing tapentadol to tapentadol plus duloxetine in patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy shows similar improvement in both groups in a range of pain relieving and quality of life measures, with similar adverse effects.. Tapentadol has been shown in a range of studies to be an effective analgesic and thus should be considered as an alternative to morphine and oxycodone, especially when opioid toxicities are an issue.

Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Humans; Morphine; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Neoplasms; Oxycodone; Pain; Phenols; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Opioid; Tapentadol

All health professionals should be aware of the importance of evaluating pain - fifth vital sign- in cancer patients. Peripheral and central acting analgesics are widely used to treat moderate to severe pain, particularly cancer pain. Many guidelines have addressed this issue. However, real life patients' have other problems and comorbidities that may raise doubts when prescribing.. Authors made a literature search, trying to clarify same specific situations: loss of oral route, renal impairment (hemodialysis), hepatic impairment, frequent opiod interactions and the availability of short-acting formulations.. The following medicines were included in this analysis: the natural opiates (morphine and codeine), their synthetic and semisynthetic derivatives (hydromorphone, oxycodone, and fentanyl), the partial agonist buprenorphine and finally tramadol and tapentadol. Transdermal systems are only available for buprenorphine and fentanyl. In hepatic impairment, fentanyl is safe, but with the exception of codeine and tramadol; other opioids should be used with caution. In renal failure: fentanyl, hydromorphone, and tapentadol are safe. Morphine should be avoided; other opioids should be used with caution. In hemodialysis, buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone and tramadol (at doses up to 200 mg/day) may be used.. Failure to recognize the impact of various situations described throughout this work, including the bioavailability due to loss of oral route, due to pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the various drugs, either in the context of the impaired metabolism or excretion, or in due to pharmacological interactions, conditions a serious risk of subtreatment of pain and consequent impact in terms of quality of life.. Opioid prescription is safe and effective, even in moderate to severe comorbidities such as renal and hepatic impairment and in patients with no oral route available. In this case, as when considering pharmacological interactions, an individualized therapeutic plan is the best solution and the patient should be assessed regularly. Unadjusted doses may relate to bad pain control and a higher prevalence of adverse events.. Introdução: A dor é equiparada a quinto sinal vital e deve ser avaliada de forma sistemática em todas as consultas de um paciente com cancro. Os fármacos utilizados na prática oncológica para tratar os doentes com dor crónica moderada a severa incluem analgésicos de ação periférica e central que têm sido abordados em múltiplas diretrizes nacionais e internacionais. No entanto, na prática clínica há que equacionar outros problemas e eventuais comorbilidades, que podem levantar dúvidas no momento da prescrição.Material e Métodos: Fez-se uma revisão da literatura, tentando refletir sobre algumas situações específicas na utilização de opióides, nomeadamente perda da via oral, insuficiência renal (hemodiálise), insuficiência hepática, interações medicamentosas e formulações de ação imediata.Resultados: Os opiáceos naturais (morfina e codeína) e os seus derivados sintéticos e semissintéticos (hidromorfona, oxicodona, fentanilo), o agonista parcial buprenorfina e finalmente o tramadol e tapentadol foram selecionados para esta análise. Os sistemas transdérmicos estão apenas disponíveis para a buprenorfina e o fentanilo. Na insuficiência hepática, o fentanilo foi considerado seguro, mascom exceção da codeína e do tramadol, podem todos ser usados com precaução. Na insuficiência renal, o fentanilo, a hidromorfona e o tapentadol foram considerados seguros. Deve evitar-se a morfina, e os restantes poderão ser usados com precaução. Em pacientes em hemodiálise pode usar-se buprenorfina, fentanilo, hidromorfona e tramadol (em doses até 200 mg/dia).Discussão: O não reconhecimento do impacto das várias situações descritas ao longo deste trabalho, nomeadamente a alteração da biodisponibilidade por perda de via oral, por alteração da farmacocinética e farmacodinâmica dos vários fármacos, quer no contexto da insuficiência de órgão responsável pelo metabolismo ou excreção, quer no contexto das interações farmacológicas, condiciona umnorme risco de subtratamento da dor e consequente impacto em termos de qualidade de vida.Conclusão: A prescrição de opióides é segura e efetiva, mesmo em situações de comorbilidades moderadas a graves como insuficiência renal e hepática e em doentes sem via oral disponível. Neste caso, como quando considerámos as interações farmacológicas, o plano terapêutico deve ser individualizado e o paciente deve ser avaliado regularmente. A seleção inadequada e/ou dose mal ajustada de um fármaco, o não reconhecimento do impacto dos efeitos adversos, frequente

Topics: Administration, Oral; Analgesics, Opioid; Buprenorphine; Cancer Pain; Codeine; Deglutition Disorders; Fentanyl; Humans; Hydromorphone; Liver Failure; Morphine; Oxycodone; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency; Tapentadol; Tramadol

This paper reviewed the 2002 guidelines established by the National Federation of Cancer Centres. A group of experts nominated by the 3 French Societies involved in the treatment of cancer pain (AFSOS, SFAP, SFETD), established new guidelines ratios for morphine switching and/or changing of route of administration, in patients for whom either pain was not adequatly managed or adverse effects were unbearable. After a rapid reminder of the pharmacokinetics and metabolism properties of morphine, experts explained why the theory of opioid rotation (oxycodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, tapentadol) using fixed equianalgesic ratios is not any more appropriate for a secure clinical practice. In the light of recent publications enhancing our knowledge on the efficacy of new drug switching ratios and for changing the route of administration of morphine, the group of experts recommended to use reconsidered switching ratios favoring security upon efficacy, to minimize overdosing and adverse effects. Consequently, after the new conversion ratio (using slow release opioids) was applied, a second titration should be done by means of normal release rescue formulations for breakthrough pain episodes. A smartphone App. OpioConvert

Topics: Administration, Oral; Analgesics, Opioid; Breakthrough Pain; Cancer Pain; Drug Substitution; Fentanyl; France; Humans; Hydromorphone; Injections, Intravenous; Injections, Subcutaneous; Methadone; Morphine; Oxycodone; Phenols; Tapentadol

Pain is a common symptom with cancer, and 30% to 50% of all people with cancer will experience moderate to severe pain that can have a major negative impact on their quality of life. Opioid (morphine-like) drugs are commonly used to treat moderate or severe cancer pain, and are recommended for this purpose in the World Health Organization (WHO) pain treatment ladder. The most commonly-used opioid drugs are buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol, and tapentadol.. To provide an overview of the analgesic efficacy of opioids in cancer pain, and to report on adverse events associated with their use.. We identified systematic reviews examining any opioid for cancer pain published to 4 May 2017 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were no or mild pain within 14 days of starting treatment, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.. We included nine reviews with 152 included studies and 13,524 participants, but because some studies appeared in more than one review the number of unique studies and participants was smaller than this. Most participants had moderate or severe pain associated with a range of different types of cancer. Studies in the reviews typically compared one type of opioid or formulation with either a different formulation of the same opioid, or a different opioid; few included a placebo control. Typically the reviews titrated dose to effect, a balance between pain relief and adverse events. Various routes of administration of opioids were considered in the reviews; oral with most opioids, but transdermal administration with fentanyl, and buprenorphine. No review included studies of subcutaneous opioid administration. Pain outcomes reported were varied and inconsistent. The average size of included studies varied considerably between reviews: studies of older opioids, such as codeine, morphine, and methadone, had low average study sizes while those involving newer drugs tended to have larger study sizes.Six reviews reported a GRADE assessment (buprenorphine, codeine, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, and tramadol), but not necessarily for all comparisons or outcomes. No comparative analyses were possible because there was no consistent placebo or active control. Cohort outcomes for opioids are therefore reported, as absolute numbers or percentages, or both.Reviews on buprenorphine, codeine with or without paracetamol, hydromorphone, methadone, tramadol with or without paracetamol, tapentadol, and oxycodone did not have information about the primary outcome of mild or no pain at 14 days, although that on oxycodone indicated that average pain scores were within that range. Two reviews, on oral morphine and transdermal fentanyl, reported that 96% of 850 participants achieved that goal.Adverse event withdrawal was reported by five reviews, at rates of between 6% and 19%. Participants with at least one adverse event were reported by three reviews, at rates of between 11% and 77%.Our GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low for all outcomes, because many studies in the reviews were at high risk of bias from several sources, including small study size.. The amount and quality of evidence around the use of opioids for treating cancer pain is disappointingly low, although the evidence we have indicates that around 19 out of 20 people with moderate or severe pain who are given opioids and can tolerate them should have that pain reduced to mild or no pain within 14 days. This accords with the clinical experience in treating many people with cancer pain, but overstates to some extent the effectiveness found for the WHO pain ladder. Most people will experience adverse events, and help may be needed to manage the more common undesirable adverse effects such as constipation and nausea. Perhaps between 1 in 10 and 2 in 10 people treated with opioids will find these adverse events intolerable, leading to a change in treatment.

Topics: Acetaminophen; Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Oral; Analgesics, Opioid; Buprenorphine; Cancer Pain; Codeine; Fentanyl; Humans; Hydromorphone; Methadone; Oxycodone; Phenols; Review Literature as Topic; Tapentadol; Tramadol

The aim of this review was to assess the role of tapentadol given at medium-high doses in opioid-tolerant patients for cancer pain management in place of step-3 analgesics.. A systematic literature search was performed out of which six studies and one secondary analysis provided data regarding tapentadol used as a step-3 analgesic for this review. Tapentadol, when used at ≥60 mg of oral morphine equivalents in opioid-tolerant patients with cancer pain, or passing from step-2 doses to ≥60 mg of oral morphine equivalents, was well tolerated and effective and could be considered as a flexible drug to be used for the management of moderate-to-severe cancer pain. The limited occurrence of gastrointestinal adverse effects may be a great advantage in the context of a disease like cancer, where multiple causes contribute to nausea, vomiting, or constipation; however, studies of tapentadol given at doses equivalent to step-3 level have some weaknesses, as data from prospective observational studies are poorly generalizable due to a small number of participants, controlled studies do not clearly show a superiority of tapentadol with respect to other opioids, and the sample size is often small.. More studies are necessary to confirm the role of tapentadol in cancer patients requiring strong opioids for their pain.

Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Constipation; Humans; Morphine; Nausea; Neoplasms; Pain Measurement; Phenols; Tapentadol; Vomiting

Tapentadol extended release (ER) is approved for the management of chronic and acute pain in adults. There has been no report of tapentadol ER pharmacokinetics in subjects with cancer pain. This analysis investigated tapentadol ER pharmacokinetics in Japanese patients with cancer pain and bridged it with the pharmacokinetics in Japanese healthy subjects and Caucasian patients with cancer pain.. Nonlinear mixed-effect pharmacokinetic modeling was conducted based on pooled tapentadol ER concentration data collected in five Phase 1 studies from 138 Japanese and Korean healthy subjects and in two Phase 3 studies from 215 Japanese and Korean subjects with cancer pain. Expected tapentadol exposure in subjects with different characteristics was assessed via simulation. Tapentadol ER exposures in Caucasian populations were compared with those in corresponding Japanese populations.. Tapentadol ER pharmacokinetics in Japanese cancer-pain patients were adequately described by a time-invariant, one-compartment disposition model with two input functions and first-order elimination. Weight, age, and albumin were identified as statistically significant covariates, but do not warrant dose adjustment. Comparable pharmacokinetics were shown between Japanese healthy and Caucasian healthy subjects, and between Japanese cancer-pain patients and Caucasian cancer-pain patients.. The apparent differences in the estimated individual pharmacokinetic parameters in Japanese healthy subjects and Japanese cancer-pain patients taking tapentadol ER were explained by covariates incorporated in a unified pharmacokinetic model. Population modeling was essential in this cross-population bridging analysis.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cancer Pain; Delayed-Action Preparations; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Models, Biological; Phenols; Tapentadol; White People; Young Adult

Pain is one of the most common symptoms in patients with cancer. The aim of this review is to summarize the most recent literature regarding tapentadol use in oncology patients and moderate or severe pain.. We have conducted a review of the literature using PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar for all manuscripts published between 2008 and 2016, using the key words "tapentadol," "cancer," "pain," "tumor," and "malignant.". Nine studies met the inclusion criteria (four randomized clinical trials and five prospective cohort studies). The scope of the literature was diverse, with 15 instruments used to measure different aspects of pain (intensity, health status, quality of life, psychometric and well-being, perception of change, and neuropathic pain). All these studies concluded that tapentadol is seemingly a well-tolerated and efficacious agent for moderate-severe cancer pain, with few typically mild adverse reactions. However, the most significant detected weaknesses of research were that (1) existing studies do not clearly show a superiority of tapentadol with respect to previous generation opioids, (2) low-to-moderate sample sizes prevent obtaining robust conclusions about effectiveness, (3) there was an absence of noninferiority trials comparing tapentadol vs. fentanyl or oxycodone-naloxone, and (4) there was scarce generalizability of prospective observational studies.. Tapentadol is seemingly an effective, well-tolerated alternative for moderate or severe cancer pain. Most prospective cohort studies have relatively small samples, are restricted to few research centers, and lack detailed subgroup information. More experience is required to draw valid generalizable conclusions.

Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Female; Humans; Pain Management; Phenols; Quality of Life; Tapentadol

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Tapentadol; Treatment Outcome

A recent randomized-withdrawal, active- and placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study showed that tapentadol prolonged release (PR) was effective and well tolerated for managing moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumour-related pain in patients who were opioid naive or dissatisfied with current treatment (Pain Physician, 2014, 17, 329-343). This post hoc, subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol PR in patients who previously received and were dissatisfied with tramadol for any reason and who had a pain intensity ≥5 (11-point numerical rating scale) before converting directly to tapentadol PR.. In the original study, eligible patients had been randomized (2:1) and titrated to their optimal dose of tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) or morphine sulphate-controlled release (40-100 mg bid) over 2 weeks. The present report focuses on results during the titration period for a subgroup of patients randomized to tapentadol PR after having been on tramadol treatment prior to randomization in the study (n = 129). Results for this subgroup are compared with results for all 338 patients who received tapentadol PR during titration (overall tapentadol PR group).. Responder rates (responders: completed titration, mean pain intensity <5 [0-10 scale] and ≤20 mg/day rescue medication during last 3 days) were slightly better for the tramadol/tapentadol PR subgroup (69.8% [90/129]) vs. the overall tapentadol PR group (63.9% [214/335]). Tolerability profiles were comparable for both groups.. Results of this subgroup analysis indicate that patients with cancer pain could safely switch from prior treatment with the weak centrally acting analgesic tramadol directly to the strong centrally acting analgesic tapentadol PR, for an improved analgesic therapy for severe pain. WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD?: Results of this post hoc analysis show that patients who had received prior tramadol therapy could switch directly to tapentadol PR, with the majority (˜70%) experiencing improved efficacy.

Topics: Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Chronic Pain; Delayed-Action Preparations; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Phenols; Tapentadol; Tramadol; Treatment Outcome

This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of tapentadol extended-release (ER) on pain control and the quality of life (QoL) of patients with moderate to severe chronic cancer pain in clinical practice in Korea.. In this prospective, open-label, multicenter trial, patients with sustained cancer pain as well as chronic pain, who were or were not using other analgesics were enrolled. Thirteen centers recorded a total of 752 patients during the 6-month observation period, based on the tapentadol ER dose and tolerability, prior and concomitant analgesic treatment, pain intensity, type of pain, adverse effects, and clinical global impression change (CGI-C). Of those 752 patients, 688 were enrolled, and 650 completed the study for efficacy and adverse drug reactions; among them, 349 were cancer patients.. Tapentadol ER significantly reduced the mean pain intensity including neuropathic pain during the observation period by 2.9 points (from a mean 7 ± 0.87 to 4.1 ± 2.02). Furthermore, QoL was observed to be significantly improved based on the CGI-C, an objective measure.. This study showed that tapentadol ER was effective for treating patients with moderate to severe cancer pain and neuropathic pain, and therefore it significantly improved the patients' QoL.

Topics: Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Chronic Pain; Delayed-Action Preparations; Humans; Neoplasms; Neuralgia; Phenols; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Tapentadol; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Chronic Pain; Constipation; Delayed-Action Preparations; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Morphine; Naloxone; Oxycodone; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Quality of Life; Tapentadol

Tapentadol has μ-opioid receptor stimulating and noradrenaline reuptake inhibiting properties, and should be effective for neuropathic pain (NP). However, the efficacy of tapentadol for NP in cancer patients is unclear. Ashiya Municipal Hospital (Hyogo, Japan) enrolled five groups of Japanese cancer patients between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019. Patients with NP were administered tapentadol (n = 29), methadone (n = 32), oxycodone (n = 20), fentanyl (n = 26), or hydromorphone (n = 20). The primary endpoint was the difference in the verbal rating scale (VRS) scores between days 0 and 7. The secondary endpoint was the tolerability of each opioid. Before administering opioids among the five groups, there was no significant difference in the VRS score (p = 0.99). The mean reduction in the VRS score on day 7 was significantly greater in the tapentadol group than in the oxycodone group (p = 0.0024) and was larger than that of the methadone, fentanyl, and hydromorphone groups. Regarding safety, the discontinuation rate in the tapentadol group was the lowest of all groups (tapentadol vs. methadone vs. oxycodone vs. fentanyl vs. hydromorphone, 0.0% vs. 6.3% vs. 5.0% vs. 3.8% vs. 10.0%, respectively). This study suggests that tapentadol could be efficacious for cancer patients with NP, and a preferred option in cases that require immediate dose adjustment or for those at high risk for adverse effects. However, the pain intensity was evaluated without pain assessment scales specific to NP. Thus, we think that it is desirable to validate our findings using assessment scales, such as the painDETECT questionnaire in future.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Fentanyl; Humans; Hydromorphone; Japan; Male; Methadone; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Neuralgia; Oxycodone; Pain Measurement; Retrospective Studies; Tapentadol

Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Animals; Behavior, Animal; Bone Neoplasms; Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic; Cancer Pain; Cell Line, Tumor; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Hyperalgesia; Injections, Spinal; Rats; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; Rats, Wistar; Receptors, Opioid, mu; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors; Tapentadol; Tetrahydronaphthalenes

Tapentadol is a dual-acting mu-opioid receptor agonist and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor with non-inferior analgesic efficacy to oxycodone and better gastrointestinal tolerability than full mu-opioid receptor agonists. Tapentadol is approved for cancer pain in Japan; however, real-world evidence on tapentadol's effectiveness and safety for cancer-related pain in Japan is limited.. This retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of tapentadol (by patient type-opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant) in 84 patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain at Ichikawa General Hospital between September 2014 and August 2016.. Almost 93% of patients achieved clinically relevant pain relief within 4 days (median). Over 90% of patients with neuropathic pain or mixed pain and all patients with nociceptive pain were responders. Pain intensity significantly decreased from baseline through to the end of maintenance period in opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients. No patients discontinued tapentadol due to serious adverse events. No opioid-naïve patients experienced nausea or vomiting during tapentadol treatment. Only three opioid-tolerant patients experienced nausea which was considered to be related to tapentadol.. Tapentadol is effective and well tolerated in opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients with cancer pain of varying pathophysiology, including those with nociceptive and/or neuropathic components. Tapentadol may be considered for first-line use in moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain.

Topics: Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Female; Humans; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Phenols; Retrospective Studies; Tapentadol

We retrospectively examined 106 cases of tapentadol use in Japan in August 2014 for cancer pain at our hospital.The advantage of the opioid medication tapentadol is that its introduction is suitable in patients undergoing anti-cancer treatment because of the low incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms, with glucuronidation involved in the metabolism, and lack of interactions with other drugs.However, depending on the dosage form and presence of swallowing disorders, the administration should be considered carefully.

Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Humans; Japan; Phenols; Retrospective Studies; Tapentadol

The objective of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of opioid switching to tapentadol(TP). It was a retrospective survey carried out at the Kitasato University Hospital outpatient clinic between September 2014 and May 2016. We evaluated pain intensity using the visual analogue scale and the occurrence of adverse effects before switching, at the first evaluation after switching, and during the steady state of TP administration. We included 10 patients; of these, 3 patients discontinued TP owing to uncontrolled pain. The conversion ratio of the previously administered opioids to TP was 1.17 at the time of the first evaluation after switching and 1.42 during the steady state. The mean(±SD)pain intensity was 4.2±2.2 before opioid switching and 4.6±2.2 at the time of the first evaluation after switching. The mean(±SD)pain intensity in the 7 patients excluding the 3 patients who discontinued TP was 4.3±2.0 before opioid switching and 2.7±1.9 during the steady state. Somnolence improved in 5 patients and constipation improved in 2 patients when a stable dose was achieved. Opioid switching to TP was appropriately accomplished using the conversion ratio. Furthermore, pain, sleepiness, and constipation improved following successful titration. These data suggest that TP can be useful in the treatment of cancer pain, in addition to the currently used opioid preparations.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Phenols; Retrospective Studies; Tapentadol

Many chemotherapy treatments induce peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). These patients often experience neuropathic pain (NP) that reduces the quality of life. The aim of this prospective, open label study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol (TP) in patients affected by CIPN. CIPN were consecutively enrolled in a prospective open label study at the Neuro-Oncology Unit of the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute in Rome. During the titration phase, each patient initially received doses of TP 50 mg twice a day. All patients underwent pain intensity (NRS) and DN4. For evaluation of quality of life, patients underwent EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-CIPN2 QLQ-CIPN20. We enrolled 31 patients, 19 were females with a median age of 60 years. After 3 months of treatment with TP, 22 patients completed the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). Nineteen patients out of 22 showed a response to treatment (86%). We also observed that TP reduced the NRS and DN4 values from baseline to the last visit in a significant way (p < 0.001, respectively). Seven patients (22.5%) discontinued the TP therapy after the first week of occurrence of side effects. Furthermore, we observed that TP improved also the global health status measured by EORT QLQ-C30. TP is well tolerated and efficacy in the treatment of NP. The important reduction of neuropathic pain, the improvement in NRS and QoL scores after therapy with TP makes it a candidate in the management of patients suffering from neuropathic pain of CIPN also as a first line of therapy.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Antineoplastic Agents; Cancer Pain; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Neuralgia; Pain Measurement; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Phenols; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Tapentadol; Treatment Outcome