Skip to content

Treatment of Pain in Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: is Methadone More Effective?

Treatment of Pain in Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: is Methadone More Effective Than Fentanyl?

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01317589
Acronym
310111-4
Enrollment
134
Registered
2011-03-17
Start date
2011-05-31
Completion date
2015-07-31
Last updated
2015-07-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cancer of Head and Neck, Pain

Keywords

Pain, Cancer of Head and Neck, methadone, Fentanyl

Brief summary

Background of the study: 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?

Detailed description

Study design The duration of the study will be 9 weeks. Patients will visit the outpatient clinic 5 times. Patients of MAASTRO clinic will be seen directly before or after the radiation therapy. No extra visits will be necessary. 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%

Interventions

DRUGfentanyl

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%

DRUGmethadone

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%

Sponsors

Maastricht University Medical Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* opioid naive patients with histological proven head-and-neck cancer and (partly) neuropathic pain with a NRS score of =/\> 4

Exclusion criteria

* age under 18 * not being able to read or fill in the questionnaires * recent operation (less than 7 days) * women of childbearing potential not using contraception

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
significant pain relief (reduction of Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) of 50%)9 weeks

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
time to achieve significant pain relief9 weeks
side-effect profile9 weeks

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026