Table 3.
Comparative efficacy of buprenorphine
| Description | Number of studies (study included) | Participants | RR (95% CI) | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| With outcomes/total (buprenorphine group) | With outcomes/total (comparator) | ||||
| TD route | |||||
| Global impression of change | 2 (Poulain et al. 2008; Pace et al. 2007) | 96/120 | 72/121 | 1.35 (1.14-2.59); I 2:42% | NNT: 4.9 (3.1-10.9) |
| Responders 35.5 μg/h | 2 (Bohme and Likar 2003; Sittl et al. 2003) | 27/76 | 17/75 | 1.58 (0.94-2.66); I 2:39% | |
| Responders 52.5 μg/h | 2 (Bohme and Likar 2003; Sittl et al. 2003) | 37/75 | 17/75 | 1.83 (1.12-2.99); I 2: 64% | NNT: 5.3 (3.06-24.09) |
| Responders 70 μg/h | 2 (Bohme and Likar 2003; Sittl et al. 2003) | 34/87 | 17/75 | 1.87 (1.17-3); I 2: 0% | NNT: 5.03 (2.98-18.6) |
| Rescue SL buprenorphine | 2 (Sorge and Sittl 2004: Sittl et al. 2003) | 79/247 | 23/84 | 1.25 (0.71-2.18); I 2: 40% | |
| Requirement of prophylactic antiemetics | 2 (Sorge and Sittl 2004: Sittl et al. 2003) | 24/129 | 53/110 | 0.63 (0.43-0.9); I 2: 4% | NNT: 3.8 (2.4-8.4) |
| Requirement of laxatives | 2 (Sorge and Sittl 2004: Wirz et al. 2009) | 45/151 | 70/160 | 1.03 (0.8-1.32); I 2: 69% | |
| Nausea | 2 (Pace et al. 2007; Wirz et al. 2009) | 11/87 | 28/84 | 0.38 (0.2-0.71); I 2: 0% | NNT: 9.3 (5.6-28.5) |
| Constipation | 2 (Aurilio et al. 2009; Wirz et al. 2009) | 32/77 | 33/71 | 0.89 (0.55-1.17); I 2: 0% | TD fentanyl |
| Constipation | 2 (Pace et al. 2007; Wirz et al. 2009) | 30/87 | 36/84 | 0.89 (0.55-1.17); I 2: 81% | Morphine |
| CNS- related AEs | 2 ((Pace et al. 2007; Sittl et al. 2003) | 12/116 | 9/73 | 0.74 (0.33-1.66); I 2: 0% | |
| Skin related AEs | 2 (Sorge and Sittl 2004: Sittl et al. 2003) | 38/209 | 9/85 | 1.42 (0.73-2.76); I 2: 16% | |
| SAEs Deaths | 2 (Bohme and Likar 2003; Sittl et al. 2003) | 3/155 | 1/75 | 1.48 (0.23-9.66); I 2: 0% | |
| IM route | |||||
| Any pain improvement (with 0.3 mg dose) | 2 (Dini et al. 1986; Taguchi 1982) | 22/42 | 6/34 | 3.03 (1.4-6.54); I 2: 0% | |
| Any pain improvement (with 0.2 mg dose) | 2 (Dini et al. 1986; Taguchi 1982) | 23/35 | 6/34 | 3.7 (1.72-7.93); I 2: 0% | |
AE’s: adverse events, SAE’s: Serious adverse events; CNS: central nervous system; IM : intramuscular injection; NNT: number-needed-to treat; RR: relative risk; SL: sublingual administration; TD: transdermal administration.