MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319787382 · doi:10.2147/jpr.s366460

Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone as Treatment for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Advanced Cancer and Noncancer Illnesses: A Post Hoc Analysis of Two Clinical Trials

2023· article· en· W4319787382 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eric D. Shah, Bruce Chamberlain, Michelle Rhiner, Neal E. Slatkin, Nancy Stambler, Robert J. Israel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersProgenics PharmaceuticalsBausch HealthAmerican Academy of Hospice and Palliative MedicineAmerican College of Gastroenterology
KeywordsMedicinePost-hoc analysisConstipationClinical trialOpioidPost hocNaltrexoneIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with and without active cancer. Patients and Methods: We analyzed two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3/4 trials (NCT00402038, NCT00672477). Patients received SC methylnaltrexone (study 302, 0.15 mg/kg; study 4000, 8 mg or 12 mg based on body weight) or placebo every other day for 2 weeks. Patients were stratified by cancer status. Primary efficacy endpoints included proportion of patients achieving rescue-free laxation (RFL); secondary endpoints included time to RFL, pain intensity scores, and safety/tolerability. Trial results were evaluated separately. Results: The safety population (patients receiving ≥ 1 study drug dose) included 364 patients (study 302, n=134; study 4000, n=230). Study 302 had 78 patients with active cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=37; placebo, n=41) and 56 without cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=26; placebo, n=30); study 4000 had 152 patients with active cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=79; placebo, n=73) and 78 without cancer (methylnaltrexone, n=37; placebo, n=41). A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with methylnaltrexone achieved a laxation response within 4 hours after at least 2 of the first 4 doses versus placebo, dosed by body weight (cancer, 54.1% [methylnaltrexone] vs 7.3% [placebo], P < 0.0001; noncancer, 48.0% vs 10.0%; P < 0.005) or given as a weight-adjusted fixed dose (cancer, 59.5% vs 6.8%; noncancer, 70.3% vs 14.6%; P < 0.0001 each). With fixed-dose methylnaltrexone, average time to RFL for patients with and without cancer was < 1 hour of the first dose; with methylnaltrexone dosed by body weight, the first RFL occurred in < 4 and < 7 hours of treatment in patients with and without cancer, respectively. No significant differences were found in pain scores. SC methylnaltrexone was well tolerated at all doses in all patient cohorts. Conclusion: SC methylnaltrexone was efficacious in inducing rapid RFL and safe among patients with and without active cancer suffering from OIC. Keywords: methylnaltrexone, opioid-induced constipation, μ-opioid receptor antagonist, cancer, chronic pain

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.235
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pain ResearchSame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207