Medlearninggroup.com
s of
Exploring Relief and
A CME/CE Supplement to PWJ—PAINWeek Journal
RELEASE DATE: December 1, 2014 
EXPIRATION DATE: December 31, 2015
 Sponsored by Global Education Group. Med Learning Group is the education partner.
This activity is supported by an educational grant from AstraZeneca.

Sanford M. Silverman, MD
This case-based enduring activity will cover the personalized care of patients with 
Comprehensive Pain Medicine
Target Audience 
Pompano Beach, Florida
This activity is designed to meet the educational needs of frontline clinicians who care for patients with chronic pain such as physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and pharmacists.
Learning Objectives 
Upon completion of the program, attendees should be able to:
- Discuss the different classes of analgesics used in the treatment of chronic pain, and their 
safety, efficacy and indications
- Recognize the most common opioid-induced side effects, OIC, and the impact of 
treatments on analgesia 
- Identify attitudes, barriers and facilitators to communicating with patients about their 
- Identify treatments used for the management of OIC
Physician Accreditation Statement- Global Education Group is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to 
provide continuing medical education for physicians. 
Physician Credit Designation- Global Education Group designates this enduring activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™. 
Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Nursing Continuing Education- Global Education Group is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses 
Credentialing Center's COA. This educational activity for 1.0 contact hours is provided by Global Education Group. Nurses should claim only the 
credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
 Pharmacist Accreditation Statement- Global Education Group (Global) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education as 
a provider of continuing pharmacy education.
Credit Designation- Global Education Group designates this continuing education activity for 1.0 contact hour(s) (0.1 CEUs) of the Accreditation 
Council for Pharmacy Education. (Universal Activity Number - 0530-9999-14-170-H01-P). This is a knowledge based activity.
 Nurse Practitioner Continuing Education- Global Education Group is approved as a provider of nurse practitioner continuing 
education by the American Association of Nurse Practitioners: AANP Provider Number 11021. This program has been approved for 0.25 contact 
hours of continuing education (1.0 Pharmacology hours).
Physician Assistants - AAPA accepts certificates of participation for educational activities certified for AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™ from 
organizations accredited by ACCME or a recognized state medical society. Physician assistants may receive a maximum of 1.0 hours of 
Category 1 credit for completing this program.

Exploring Relief and 
Managing Side Effects of
Instructions to Receive Credit- There are no fees for participating and receiving CME credit for this enduring activity. 
To receive CME/CE credit participants must:
- Read the learning objectives and faculty disclosures.
- Complete the pre-test through this link: https://www.research.net/s/PainSupppre
- Participate in the activity.
- Complete the post-test and activity evaluation through this link: https://www.research.net/s/Painsupppost
- Physicians who successfully complete the post-test and evaluation will receive CME credit.
- All non-physician participants who successfully complete the post-test and evaluation will receive a certificate of participation. All certificates 
will be emailed within 30 days.
Fee & Refund/Cancellation Policy- There is no fee for this educational activity.
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest- Global Education Group (Global) requires instructors, planners, managers and other individuals and their 
spouse/life partner who are in a position to control the content of this activity to disclose any real or apparent conflict of interest they may have 
as related to the content of this activity. All identified conflicts of interest are thoroughly vetted by Global for fair balance, scientific objectivity of 
studies mentioned in the materials or used as the basis for content, and appropriateness of patient care recommendations.
The faculty reported the following financial relationships or relationships to products or devices they or their spouse/life partner have with 
commercial interests related to the content of this CME activity:
Name of Faculty or Presenter 
Reported Financial Relationship
 Sanford M. Silverman, MD 
Nothing to disclose
The planners and managers reported the following financial relationships or relationships to products or devices they or their spouse/life partner have with commercial interests related to the content of this CME activity:
Name of Planner or Manager 
Reported Financial Relationship
Ashley Marostica, RN, MSN 
Nothing to disclose
Amanda Glazar, PhD 
Nothing to disclose
Nothing to disclose
Nothing to disclose
Nothing to disclose
Nothing to disclose
Nothing to disclose
Disclosure of Unlabeled Use- This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not 
indicated by the FDA. Global Education Group (Global) does not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications. The opinions 
expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization associated with this 
activity. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and 
warnings.
Disclaimer- Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own 
professional development. The information presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any 
procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation 
of patient conditions and possible contraindications on dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer's product information, and 
comparison with recommendations of other authorities.
The PAINWeekEnd™ Educational Summit Series brings live education 
Hypogonadism and likely hypogonadotropic hypogonadism have 
about pain management to healthcare professionals through regional 
correlated with side effects in men such as sexual dysfunction, 
professional conferences. Each conference also includes an accredited 
depression, and decreased energy levels. Chronic opioid 
continuing medical education activity hosted by a faculty chairperson. 
administration can lead to decreases in testosterone in a dose-
This supplement is designed to capture and expand upon some of the 
dependent manner. Women can also have hormonal side effects of 
content of the PAINWeekEnd™ live program in print form. The 
opioids, such as depression, dysmenorrhea, sexual dysfunction, and 
management of chronic pain with opioids and the ensuing side 
reduced bone mineral density.4 
effects will be discussed, with a particular focus on opioid-induced 
Hyperalgesia or hyperalgia is an increased sensitivity to pain that 
constipation (OIC), and how to communicate with patients about 
presents as increased pain despite increasing doses of opioids. 
Long-term opioid use or use of high doses may be associated with 
the development of hyperalgesia, which may be related to opioid 
CHRONIC PAIN OVERVIEW
metabolites and opioid-induced cell apoptosis.4 
The Institute of Medicine has estimated that more than 100 million 
Americans are living with pain that lasts from weeks to years, and that 
the financial costs of chronic pain total up to $635 billion annually.1 
Constipation is an extremely common side effect of opioid treatment, 
The high prevalence of chronic pain goes hand in hand with high rates 
occurring in 40% to 95% of patients, with the possibility of occurring 
of opioid therapy. Sales of opioid analgesics quadrupled between 1999 
after just a single dose.5 And, with the increase in the use of opioids, 
and 2010, with more than 256 million opioid prescriptions filled in 2009 
the absolute numbers of patients affected by OIC is also growing.8 
alone.2 Opioid therapy is not without its side effects, though, and 
In patients who require chronic analgesia, constipation can be a 
clinicians must be aware of the common side effects and ready to 
debilitating side effect that negatively impacts quality of life.4,9 With up 
address them in a timely manner to prevent its toxicity from 
to 56% of patients discontinuing their opioid treatment due to lack of 
outweighing its effectiveness in treating pain. Of the side effects 
efficacy or side effects, addressing constipation is critical.3,10 
commonly associated with opioid use, constipation is the most 
prevalent.3 Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is an expected part of 
While OIC can occur in any patient treated with opioids, there are 
opioid treatment that is unlikely to improve over time, and so it should 
certain risk factors that can increase a patient's likelihood of 
be closely monitored and treated prophylactically, with a bowel regimen 
developing OIC. These risk factors include advanced age, female, 
initiated as soon as it is deemed necessary.2,4,5 
type of opioid therapy, relative immobility of the patient, dehydration, 
altered nutritional intake, anal fissures, and any kind of mechanical 
The American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Chronic Pain 
obstruction within the gastrointestinal tract.11,12 Also, based on the 
Management and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and 
numerous causes of constipation, which can be either primary 
Pain Medicine joined forces to created practice guidelines for the 
(idiopathic) or secondary, it is important to determine if opioids are 
management of chronic pain. These guidelines recognize that many dif-
actually the cause of the constipation so that the treatment plan is 
ferent classes of pharmacologic agents can be used to treat chronic pain, accurately informed (Table 1).13 
including anticonvulsants, antidepressants, benzodiazepines, 
N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, nonsteroidal 
Table 1. Examples of primary (idiopathic) and secondary causes of 
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, skeletal muscle relaxants, 
constipation symptoms.13 
and topical agents such as lidocaine, capsaicin, and ketamine.6 This 
range of medicines gives an idea of the heterogeneous nature of pain, as 
PRIMARY (Idiopathic) 
well as its range of severity, duration, and causes. 
Normal-transit constipation 
OPIOID-INDUCED SIDE EFFECTS
Slow-transit constipation 
Inadequate physical activity
Opioid therapy can be an effective tool, especially initially, in the quest 
Defecatory or rectal 
to relieve patients' chronic pain.7 It can be associated with a number of 
evacuation disorders:  
Use of certain medications:
complications, however, that may limit its effectiveness, leading to 
• Pelvic floor dyssynergia
• Aluminum-containing antacids
early discontinuation, under-dosing, and inadequate analgesia. Some 
• Hirschsprung's disease
• Antispasmodics
of the most common side effects found to be associated with opioid 
• Antidepressants 
use include constipation, nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, 
• Paradoxical pelvic floor 
physical dependence, and sedation.4 Other issues that can arise with 
• Anticonvulsants
opioid therapy include pruritus, dizziness, tolerance, diversion, and 
• Functional rectosigmoid 
• Pain medications 
hyperalgesia.4,5 
 (especially narcotics)
Nausea occurs in approximately 25% of patients treated with opioids, 
• Spastic pelvic floor syndrome
• Calcium-channel blockers
and is usually transient, although treatment should be instituted if 
• Descending perineum syndrome • Nonsteroidal 
substantial nausea and vomiting occur. The central nervous system 
anti-inflammatory drugs 
effects of opioid therapy, such as sedation and decreased cognition, are 
Older age Pregnancy 
also usually transient, but treatment might be required to help cope with 
the undesirable effects. These adverse events seem to present at opioid 
initiation or with dose increases. Pruritus with opioid use occurs in 2% to 
• Postsurgical abnormalities
10% of patients, but the likelihood increases if the opioid is administered 
by epidural or intraspinal injections.5 
Tolerance, which is a loss of analgesic potency, leads to requirements for 
• Hypothyroidism
dose increases with accompanying decreases in effectiveness 
• Hypercalcemia
over time. There is no cross tolerance with opioids, so the development 
• Hyperparathyroidism
of tolerance to one opioid does not necessarily confer tolerance to a 
different opioid. Therefore, switching opioids in a patient who has 
developed tolerance may require lowering the dose of the second 
• Cerebrovascular events
Opioids have demonstrated effects on a number of hormones including 
• Multiple sclerosis
testosterone, estrogen, luteinizing hormone, gonadotrophin releasing 
• Parkinson's disease
hormone, dehydroepiandrosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfates, 
adrenocorticotropin, corticotropin-releasing hormone, and cortisol. 
Of the three receptor classes in the enteric nervous system – δ, κ, and 
Effective communication between the clinician and the patient about 
μ – the μ-opioid receptor seems to be the principal mediator of the 
constipation has been linked to improved outcomes, increased patient 
effects of opioid agonists on the gastrointestinal tract. The binding of 
satisfaction, and decreased utilization of care. This communication can 
opioid agonists to these receptors inhibits the release of excitatory and 
be strengthened by asking open-ended questions, actively listening 
inhibitory neurotransmitters, interrupting the contractions required 
to the patient, and displaying empathy during the patient's visit.14 
for intestinal motility and reducing mucosal secretions. Administering 
Because the topic of OIC deals with bowel habits that could be 
exogenous opioids can cause opioid bowel dysfunction by decreasing 
potentially embarrassing for the patient to discuss, it is important to 
peristalsis, reducing secretions into the gut, and increasing reabsorp-
actively seek out the information from patients that might uncover 
tion of fluid from the gut, leading to the formation of dry, hard stools 
symptoms that need to be addressed. Patients must feel that their 
that can be difficult to pass.19 
clinician takes them seriously, or they may be reticent to admit 
to having symptoms.15 
TREATING OPIOID-INDUCED CONSTIPATION 
When initiating an opioid regimen, it is safe to assume that all 
Both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment options 
patients treated with opioids will experience some degree of bowel 
are available for OIC. Its nonpharmacologic treatment is based on 
dysfunction during their treatment until proven otherwise. In order to 
lifestyle modification. Typically, these measures include increasing the 
properly assess whether OIC is an issue, an accurate medical history 
consumption of dietary fiber and fluids and increasing physical 
including current bowel habits and any current measures that may be 
activity, all of which should begin at the initiation of opioid therapy 
used to ensure regularity can help to establish a baseline. It would also 
and continue for the duration of treatment.20 According to the Agency 
be helpful to capture any history of bowel function variability that the 
for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) of the U.S Department of 
patient experienced either as an adult or a child. 
Health & Human Services, these changes in lifestyle should be 
One aspect to keep in mind when discussing OIC with patients is that 
implemented as soon as an individual is identified to be at risk for 
clinicians and patients may have vastly disparate definitions in mind 
constipation. Fluid intake should measure at least 1.5 liters (or 6 cups) 
regarding what constitutes constipation. The number of stools passed 
each day. Fiber provides the bulk needed by the colon to eliminate 
is just one of a number of criteria of constipation, and it is not even a 
body waste. As fiber passes through the colon, it acts as a sponge and 
necessary one for diagnosis, so if the correct questions are not asked, 
patients who think they do not have constipation may actually have 
absorbs water, resulting in bulkier and softer stools. Then, waste moves 
it by other parts of its definition. The components set forth by the 
through the body more quickly, allowing for easier and more regular 
Rome III criteria can offer up useful criteria to discuss with patients, 
bowel movements. For individuals whose fluid intake measures at least 
such as number of stools, straining, sensations while defecating, 
1500 mL per day, a dietary fiber (including both insoluble and soluble 
and consistency of stools (Table 2), as can Table 3, which differentiates 
fiber) intake between 20 and 35 grams minimum per day is 
normal bowel characteristics from constipation symptoms.12,16 
recommended. Activity recommendations should be tailored to each individual's physical abilities and general level of health, and can vary 
Table 2. Rome III diagnostic criteria for constipation16 
from walking 15 to 20 minutes or more once or twice a day for fully 
At least 2 of the following experienced for the last 3 months with 
mobile patients, to ambulating at least 50 feet twice a day for patients 
onset at least 6 months prior:
with limited mobility, to 15 to 20 minutes of chair exercises at least 
• Straining ≥25% of the time
twice a day for patients unable to walk or who are restricted to 
bed rest. In addition, routine toileting in an upright position is 
• Hard stools ≥25% of the time
recommended 5 to 15 minutes after meals, as ignoring or suppressing 
Inadequate physical activity
• Sensation of incomplete evacuation ≥25% of the time
the urge to defecate can contribute to constipation.21 
• Sensation of anorectal obstruction/blockage ≥25% of the time
Use of certain medications:
• Manual maneuvers to facilitate bowel movements ≥25% of the time
• Aluminum-containing antacids
• Antispasmodics
• <3 bowel movements per week
• Antidepressants 
• Anticonvulsants
Table 3. Differentiation between normal stool evacuation and constipation12
• Pain medications 
CONSTIPATION LIKELY 
 (especially narcotics)
• Calcium-channel blockers
Frequency of stools 
≥3 evacuations per week and ≥3 evacuations per week 
≥3 evacuations per week
• Nonsteroidal 
Weight of stools 
anti-inflammatory drugs 
Older age Pregnancy 
Weight of water in stools 
Time taken by gastrointestinal passage 
Pathophysiology of Opioid-Induced Constipation
If symptoms of constipation persist despite instituting appropriate 
Opioids exert their effects through the activation of opioid receptors.17 
lifestyle modifications, nonpharmacologic options can be combined 
• Hypothyroidism
Opioid receptors exist throughout the central and the peripheral 
with laxatives and other drugs to treat OIC (Table 4).19 The most 
• Hypercalcemia
nervous system, as well as the intestinal musculature and other 
common laxative regimen for OIC involves combining a stimulant and a 
• Hyperparathyroidism
tissues.8 Activating opioid receptors in the central nervous system 
stool softener to both increase muscle activity and lubricate and soften 
results in analgesia, whereas activation of opioid receptors in the gut 
stools, improving the ease with which stools pass.20 Laxatives do not 
wall results in reduced gut motility, delayed gastric emptying, 
address the causes of OIC however, leading to inadequate symptom 
increased sphincter tone, and a slower gut transit time.18
relief for many patients.18 Bulk-forming laxatives are often used as 
• Cerebrovascular events
It appears as if endogenous opioids in the gastrointestinal tract 
first-line agents due to their low toxicity and cost, but in certain
• Multiple sclerosis
coordinate the contractile process under normal healthy conditions, 
patients, they can lead to abdominal distention and flatulence. 
• Parkinson's disease
suppressing motility when required, as it may be during situations 
Emollients such as docusate sodium increase the moisture content of 
involving inflammation, stress, or trauma.
fecal mass and are primarily used to prevent constipation in specific 
situations, such as during post-operative recovery, when straining 
due to a bowel movement may be harmful to the patient. Osmotic 
Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists
laxatives promote water retention within the colon, leading to 
Another strategy to address OIC is to employ an opioid antagonist 
increased pressure, which induces intestinal motility.21 
to bind to opioid receptors without activating them, effectively 
blocking the receptors. While opioid antagonists such as naloxone 
Table 4. Common laxatives19 
act on both peripheral and central μ-opioid receptors, 
methylnaltrexone belongs to a new class of drugs that selectively 
MECHANISM OF ACTION 
antagonizes peripheral μ-opioid receptors in the gastrointestinal 
Stool softeners and emollients 
Lubricates and softens stools
system, helping to relieve OIC while maintaining analgesic effects.26-30 
(eg, dioctyl sodium, docusate 
As a charged naltrexone derivative, methylnaltrexone has no effect 
on the central nervous system when given to humans.31 
Stimulants and irritants (eg, 
Alters intestinal mucosal 
A 2-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial 
senna, bisacodyl)
permeability; stimulates muscle 
with a 3-month open-label extension was conducted to determine the 
activity and fluid secretions
efficacy and safety of the peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor 
Osmotic agents (eg, lactulose, 
Osmotic effect of salts leads to 
antagonist (PAMORA) methylnaltrexone in patients with OIC who 
magnesium salts, sorbitol)
greater fluid retention in bowel 
were receiving opioid therapy for advanced illness. Significantly more 
lumen and a net increase of fluid 
patients treated with subcutaneous methylnaltrexone than placebo 
secretions in the small intestine
experienced rescue-free laxation (defecation) within 4 hours after 
 receiving the first dose of study drug (48% vs 15%, respectively; 
Bulk agents (eg, psyllium 
Increases fecal bulk and fluid 
P<0.001) (Figure 2).30 Pain scores remained similar between the two 
retained in the bowel lumen
study groups at baseline and at each evaluation. Adverse events that 
occurred more frequently in the active treatment arm included 
Non-absorbable solutions (eg, 
abdominal pain, flatulence, nausea, increased body temperature, 
polyethylene glycol [PEG])
and dizziness.30 
Reflex evacuation
Figure 2. Primary efficacy outcomes with methylnaltrexone.30 
Aside from laxatives, OIC can also be treated using the chloride channel 
activator lubiprostone, which stimulates bowel secretory action by 
increasing chloride and fluid secretion into the intestines. Clinical trials 
Placebo (N=71) Methylnaltrexone (N=62)
have shown that lubiprostone improved the number of spontaneous 
bowel movements, stool consistency, bloating, and global assessment 
of constipation compared with placebo (P<0.05). Its most common 
adverse event was nausea, occurring in 30.9% of patients. This side 
effect, however, was found to be dose dependent, and it decreased 
when administered with food.22 Figure 1 offers one suggested 
algorithm to guide the order of possible pharmacotherapy for OIC. 
Figure 1. Treatment algorithm for OIC. 
Stool softeners and 
Laxaon within 4 Hr aer 
Laxaon within 4 Hr aer 
mild stimulation agents 
≥2 of the First 4 Doses
≥ of the First 4 Doses
Investigational Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid 
In addition to methylnaltrexone, the only PAMORA currently approved 
by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of OIC, 
there are a number of investigational compounds in this class that 
are being tested, including naloxegol, bevenopran, naldemedine, and 
axelopran (TD-1211). An older PAMORA, alvimopan, is also approved by the U.S. Food and 
Drug Administration, but only to accelerate the time to upper and 
lower gastrointestinal recovery following surgeries including partial 
Chloride channel activator
Peripherally acting 
 u-opioid receptor 
bowel resection with primary anastomosis, and not for OIC.32 Issues 
with alvimopan's cardiovascular safety profile due to 7 myocardial 
infarctions versus 0 with placebo precluded its approval for OIC, but 
a recent Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee 
The motility stimulant tegaserod was originally approved to treat 
meeting of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration held in June deemed 
irritable bowel syndrome with constipation and chronic idiopathic 
that this was not a class effect, and that the cardiovascular safety of 
constipation (although not specifically opioid-induced constipation), 
other PAMORAs could be assessed during postmarketing observational 
but was later removed from the market in 2007 due to concerns about 
studies rather than in prospective safety trials prior to approval.33-35 
possible adverse cardiovascular effects.23 It is still available for use 
Of the investigational PAMORAs, naloxegol is the furthest along in 
where allowed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in emergency 
its clinical development program. It is a PEGylated conjugate of 
situations that are immediately life-threatening or serious enough 
naloxol that was designed using small-molecule polymer conjugate 
to qualify for hospitalization.24 Its desired therapeutic effects are 
technology. The PEGylation serves to alter its metabolism so that the 
achieved through activation of the 5-HT4 receptors of the enteric 
first-pass effect is reduced and its bioavailability is increased and to 
nervous system in the gastrointestinal tract.25 
modify its distribution, reducing penetration into the central nervous 
In two identical phase 3, double-blind clinical trials (KODIAC-04 
The most common adverse events reported with greater frequency 
and KODIAC-05), oral naloxegol 25 mg given once daily produced 
in the naloxegol arm compared with placebo were abdominal pain 
significantly higher response rates (defined as ≥3 spontaneous bowel 
(17.8% vs 3.3%), diarrhea (12.9% vs 5.9%), nausea (9.4% vs 4.1%), 
movements per week and an increase from baseline of ≥1 spontaneous 
headache (9.0% vs 4.8%), and flatulence (6.9% vs 1.1%).
bowel movements for ≥9 of 12 weeks and for ≥3 of the final 4 weeks) than placebo did (study 04, 44.4% vs 29.4%, P=0.001; study 05, 39.7% 
 Most of the naloxegol-emergent gastrointestinal adverse events 
vs 29.3%, P=0.02). Responses were also higher with naloxegol in a 
occurred early and were transient. Fourteen patients discontinued 
subpopulation of patients with an inadequate response to laxatives. 
naloxegol therapy due to abdominal pain. Two patients in each group 
Time to first postdose spontaneous bowel movement was shorter 
experienced major cardiovascular events, which were 
and mean number of days per week with one or more spontaneous 
independently and prospectively adjudicated.37
bowel movements was higher with 25 mg of naloxegol compared with 
Phase 3 trials (ASCENT) in OIC in patients with chronic noncancer 
placebo in both studies (P<0.001). The pain scores and the daily opioid 
pain for another small-molecule PAMORA, bevenopran, were begun 
dose were similar among groups. Adverse events, which were 
in July 2013 but were then terminated by the manufacturer at the 
primarily gastrointestinal, occurred most frequently in the groups 
end of 2013 in light of the planned FDA Advisory Committee meeting 
treated with naloxegol 25 mg.36 
regarding cardiovascular safety of PAMORAs, as well as due to 
In a long-term, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, 
enrollment challenges faced with the way the trials were designed. 
phase 3 safety and tolerability trial (KODIAC-08), outpatients 
It is uncertain yet whether the trials will be reinstated now that the 
with OIC who were taking 30 to 1000 morphine-equivalent units 
results of the advisory meeting are available.38 Two completed phase 
per day for at least 4 weeks to treat noncancer pain were either 
2 trials showed that bevenopran demonstrated statistically significant 
enrolled as new patients or from one of the prior naloxegol trials and 
and clinically relevant efficacy in patients suffering from OIC, and the 
randomized to naloxegol 25 mg once daily or usual-care treatment 
study drug was also well tolerated, with no evidence of drug-related 
for OIC as chosen by the investigator. Of the 804 patients enrolled, 
central opioid withdrawal or reversal of analgesia.39 
the mean duration of exposure to naloxegol was 268.1 days and to usual care was 296.7 days.37 
C A S E S T U D Y 1
This 82-year-old woman presents with osteoporosis, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure 
with multiple thoracic and lumbar compression fractures. Her pain is being treated with morphine 
extended-release 30 mg twice daily. She lives in an assisted living facility and ambulates with assistance 
and using a walker. She currently has fewer than 2 bowel movements per week with bloating. She uses bulk 
fiber agents without relief from her constipation symptoms: milk of magnesia, lactulose, and other 
osmotic agents resulted in abdominal pain. 
What type of constipation is occurring?a) Primaryb) Secondaryc) Both
This patient has both primary and secondary constipation. 
Assessment: What non-pharmacologic methods would you consider?
a) Toileting
b) Ambulation
c) Fluid intake
d) Fiber intake
e) All of the above
She could possibly be aided by all of the above non-pharmacologic methods such as toileting, ambulation, fluid intake, 
and fiber intake. 
Based on the AHRQ guidelines, what would be the next modality to be used?
a) Senna
b) Docusate sodium
c) PEG
d) Lubiprostone
Although some clinicians may think the patient should be treated with senna or docusate sodium next, 
the better choice would be lubiprostone, because she has already tried the other options, which did not 
bring her relief and actually caused her abdominal pain.
With two phase 2 trials completed, there are 3 phase 3 trials currently 
Three large, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 clinical 
ongoing with the PAMORA known as naldemedine to determine its 
trials in patients with moderate to severe, chronic, nonmalignant pain 
long-term safety effects and its efficacy and safety in patients with 
were conducted, along with a prospectively planned pooled analysis of 
OIC who are not receiving laxatives.40-44 Likewise, phase 2 trials of the 
two of these trial, which demonstrated that oxycodone/naloxone PR 
PAMORA axelopran (TD-1211) have been completed, although a phase 
relieved pain more effectively than placebo and no less effectively than 
3 program has not yet begun.45-48 
oxycodone PR after 12 weeks. The combination was generally well tolerated. The most commonly reported adverse events were of 
Fixed Combination Oxycodone/Naloxone Prolonged-Release
gastrointestinal origin, but numerically lower rates of constipation 
While much of the research being conducted for OIC treatments has 
were observed in the oxycodone/naloxone PR group compared with 
been for novel PAMORAs, there are other mechanisms also being 
the oxycodone PR group, offering some promise for those suffering 
studied. One such agent is a fixed combination of prolonged-release 
oxycodone and prolonged-release naloxone (an opioid antagonist) in a single tablet with a 2:1 ratio.49 
C A S E S T U DY 2
This 79-year-old man has a history of diabetic neuropathy, prostate cancer, simple prostatectomy, 
 radiation, and lumbar and cervical degenerative disc disease. He is treated with gabapentin, 
amitriptyline, and transdermal fentanyl 75 μg every 72 hours. His stools are very hard and cause 
straining. He has a daily painful bowel movement, which has worsened with increases in fentanyl 
dosing. Each day, he consumes 50 g of fiber, uses the treadmill, and drinks 3 L of fluids. 
What type of constipation is occurring?a) Primaryb) Secondaryc) Both
This patient has secondary constipation that is purely opioid-induced. He is doing everything he should be doing as 
per the AHRQ guidelines – taking fiber, exercising, drinking plenty of fluids – and still he has constipation that was 
not present prior to receiving pain medication. 
His symptoms worsened as the opioid dose increased, also pointing toward a secondary cause. What pharmacologic therapy 
would you consider first?
a) Lactulose
b) Methylnaltrexone
c) Docusate sodium
d) Osmotic agents (lactulose)
Because the patient has daily bowel movements that are hard and accompanied by straining, stool softeners 
would be the first choice, so docusate sodium would be appropriate. The docusate helps a little with consistency, 
but he still has feelings of fullness and retention after evacuation. Appropriate choices at this point include the 
following except:
a) Senna
b) Lubiprostone
c) Methylnaltrexone
d) Psyllium
The patient has already optimized his non-pharmacologic routine with healthy behaviors. He has 
decreased bowel motility. All of the agents listed here will increase motility except for psyllium, which 
is the correct answer. 
1. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Relieving Pain in America: A Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research. Washington, 
DC: The National Academies Press. 2011.
2. Manchikanti L, Abdi S, Atluri S, et al. American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing in 
chronic non-cancer pain: part I – evidence assessment. Pain Physician. 2012;15:S1-S66.
3. Kalso E, Edwards JE, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Opioids in chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review of efficacy and safety. Pain. 2004;112:372-380.
4. Benyamin R, Trescot AM, Datta S, et al. Opioid complications and side effects. Pain Physician. 2008;11(2 suppl):S105-S120.
5. Swegle JM, Logemann C. Management of common opioid-induced adverse effects. Am Fam Physician. 2006;74:1347-1354.
6. Practice guidelines for chronic pain management: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Chronic Pain 
Management and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. Anesthesiology. 2010;112(4) 810-833.
7. Ballantyne JC, Shin NS. Efficacy of opioids for chronic pain: a review of the evidence. Clin J Pain. 2008;24:469-478.
8. Aurilio C, Pace MC, Pota V, Sansone P. Chapter 6: Opioid induced constipation. In Catto-Smith AG, ed. Constipation – Causes, Diagnosis 
-opioid-induced constipation. Accessed July 21, 2014. 
9. Camilleri M. Opioid-induced constipation: challenges and therapeutic opportunities. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:835-842.
10. Furlan AD, Sandoval JA, Mailis-Gagnon A, Tunks E. Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and side effects. 
11. Ahmedzai SH, Boland J. Constipation in people prescribed opioids. Clin Evid (online). 2010;2010. pii: 2407.
12. Clemens KE, Klaschik E. Managing opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness: focus on methylnaltrexone bromide. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 
2010; 6:77-82.
13. Johanson JF. Review of the treatment options for chronic constipation. MedGenMed. 2007;9(2):25. 14. Di Palma JA, Herrera JL. The role of effective clinician-patient communication in the management of irritable bowel syndrome and 
chronic constipation. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2012;46(9):748-751.
15. Davis MA. A perspective on cultivating clinical empathy. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2009;15:76-79.
16. Rome III diagnostic criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders. www.romecriteria.org/assets/pdf/19_RomeIII_apA_885-898.pdf. 
Accessed August 4, 2014. 
17. Costantino CM, Gomes I, Stockton SD Jr, Lim MP, Devi LA. Opioid receptor heteromers in analgesia. Expert Rev Mol Med. 2012;14:e9.
18. Ahmedzai SH, Nauck F, Bar-Sela G, Bosse B, Leyendecker P, Hopp M. A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, double-dummy, 
parallel-group study to determine the safety and efficacy of oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets in patients with moderate/severe, 
chronic cancer pain. Palliat Med. 2012;26(1):50-60.
19. Panchal SJ, Müller-Schwefe P, Wurzelmann JI. Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: prevalence, pathophysiology and burden. Int J Clin Pract. 
20. Kumar L, Barker C, Emmanuel A. Opioid-induced constipation: pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and management. 
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2014;2014:141737.
21. McKay SL, Fravel M, Scanlon C. Management of constipation. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Gerontological Nursing Interventions Research 
Center, Research Translation and Dissemination Core; 2009 Oct. Guideline Summary NGC-7535.
22. Rivkin A, Chagan L. Lubiprostone: chloride channel activator for chronic constipation. Clin Ther. 2006;28(12):2008-2021.
23. Sprawls KS, Spierings EL, Tran D. Chapter 7: Drugs in development for opioid-induced constipation. In: Catto-Smith AG, ed. Constipation – 
cessed August 6, 2014.
24. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Zelnorm (tegaserod maleate) information. www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/postmarketdrugsafety 
informationforpatientsandproviders/ucm103223.htm. Accessed August 6, 2014. Last updated May 11, 2012.
25. Jing F, Zhang J. Metabolic kinetics of 5-hydroxytryptamine and the research targets of functional gastrointestinal disorders. 
Dig Dis Sci. 2014 Jun 12. [epub ahead of print]
26. De Schepper HU, Cremonini F, Park MI, Camilleri M. Opioids and the gut: pharmacology and current clinical experience. Neurogastroenterol 
27. Kurz A, Sessler DI. Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: pathophysiology and potential new therapies. Drugs. 2003;63:649-671.
28. Latasch L, Zimmerman M, Eberhardt B, Jurna I. Treatment of morphine-induced constipation with oral naloxone. [German] 
29. Holzer P. Opioid antagonists for prevention and treatment of opioid-induced gastrointestinal effects. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2010;23:616-622.
30. Thomas J, Karver S, Cooney GA, et al. Methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness. N Engl J Med. 
31. Yuan CS. Clinical status of methylnaltrexone, a new agent to prevent and manage opioid-induced side effects. J Support Oncol. 2004;2:111-117.
32. Entereg ® (alvimopan) [package insert]. Lexington, MA: Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2013.
33. Mortenson E. Entereg® (alvimopan) OBD study GSK014 safety findings. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/08/slides/2008-4336s1- 
04-Adolor-Mortensen.pdf. Accessed August 6, 2014.
34. Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Briefing Document. Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory 
Committee Meeting. June 11-12, 2014. www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/Anesthetic 
AndAnalgesicDrugProductsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM400205.pdf. Accessed August 6, 2014. 
35. Bell K. FDA advisory committee advises against requiring CV outcomes trials for opioid-induced constipation drugs. June 12, 2014. 
www.firstwordpharma.com/node/1217128#axzz39cycv967. Accessed August 6, 2014.
36. Chey WD, Webster L, Sostek M, Lappalainen J, Barker PN, Tack J. Naloxegol for opioid-induced constipation in patients with noncancer pain. 
N Engl J Med. 2014;370(25):2387-2396.
37. Webster L, Chey W, Tack J, Lappalainen J, Barker P, Sostek M. Long-term safety and tolerability of naloxegol in patients with opioid-induced 
constipation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108(suppl 1):S568. Abstract 1880. 
38. Form 10-K for Cubist Pharmaceuticals Inc. Annual Report. February 25, 2014. http://biz.yahoo.com/e/140225/cbst10-k.html. 
Accessed August 6, 2014. 
39. Techner L, Singla N, Gabriel K, Mangano R. ADL5945, a potent orally bioavailable peripheral opioid receptor antagonist, improves bowel 
motility w/a low incidence/severity of GI AEs in a dose-dependent manner: results of 2 Ph 2 trials in opioid-induced constipation pts (45CL242 
and 45CL243). J Pain. 2012;13(4 suppl):S84. Abstract 434.
40. ClinicalTrials.gov. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-ascending dose study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of S-297995 
for the treatment of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction in subjects with chronic pain. NCT01122030.
41. ClinicalTrials.gov. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of S-297995 for the treatment of opioid-induced 
constipation in subjects with non-malignant chronic pain receiving opioid therapy. NCT01443403. 
42. ClinicalTrials.gov. A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study to evaluate the long-term safety 
of naldemedine for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in subjects with non-malignant chronic pain receiving opioid therapy. 
43. ClinicalTrials.gov. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of naldemedine in the treatment of opioid-induced 
constipation in subjects with non-malignant chronic pain receiving opioid therapy. NCT01965158. 
44. ClinicalTrials.gov. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of naldemedine in the treatment of opioid-induced 
constipation in subjects with non-malignant chronic pain receiving opioid therapy. NCT01993940.
45. ClinicalTrials.gov. A single-blind, pilot study to determine the tolerability and safety of TD-1211 in subjects with opioid-induced 
46. ClinicalTrials.gov. A phase 1/phase 2, randomized, double-blind, multiple ascending dose study to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and 
effect on opioid analgesia of TD-1211 administered orally to healthy volunteers and to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and effect on 
bowel movements in subjects with opioid-induced constipation. NCT01040637.
47. ClinicalTrials.gov. A phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study to assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical 
activity of TD-1211 in subjects with opioid-induced constipation. NCT01333540.
48. ClinicalTrials.gov. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study to assess the safety and efficacy of TD-1211 in subjects 
with opioid-induced constipation. NCT01459926.
49. Burness CB, Keating GM. Oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release: a review of its use in the management of chronic pain while counteracting 
opioid-induced constipation. Drugs. 2014;74(3):353-375.
s of
Exploring Relief and
Source: http://www.medlearninggroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/pain_supplement_12pages_v7.pdf
   Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (2005) 99S, S1—S8 Public-private partnerships: an overviewRoy Widdus Initiative on Public-Private Partnerships for Health (IPPPH), Global Forum for Health Research, Received 16June 2005; accepted 17 June 2005 The development and marketing of medicines needed specifically to
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg66:223-230, 2008 Outcomes of Placing Dental Implants in Patients Taking Oral Bisphosphonates: A Review of 115 Cases Bao-Thy Grant, DDS,* Christopher Amenedo, DDS,† Katherine Freeman, DrPH,‡ and Richard A. Kraut, DDS§ Purpose: In recent years, numerous cases of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw havebeen reported involving both intravenous and oral therapy regimens. The majority of these cases haveinvolved intravenous bisphosphonates. Subsequently, drug manufacturers and the US Food and DrugAdministration issued warnings about possible bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw. TheAmerican Dental Association and the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons assembledexpert panels to formulate treatment guidelines. Both panels differentiated between patients receivingbisphosphonates intravenously and those receiving the drugs orally. However, the recommendationswere based on limited data, especially with regard to patients taking oral bisphosphonates. We wantedto ascertain the extent to which bisphosphonate-associated necrosis of the jaw has occurred in our dentalimplant patients. We also wanted to determine whether there was any indication that the bisphospho-nate therapy affected the overall success of the implants as defined by Albrektsson and Zarb.Patients and Methods: We identified 1,319 female patients over the age of 40 who had received dentalimplants at Montefiore Medical Center between January 1998 and December 2006. A survey about bisphos-phonate therapy was mailed to all 1,319 patients. Responses were received from 458 patients of whom 115reported that they had taken oral bisphosphonates. None had received intravenous bisphosphonates. All 115patients were contacted and informed about the risk of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw.Seventy-two patients returned to the clinic for follow-up clinical and radiological evaluation.Results: A total of 468 implants were placed in the 115 patients who reported that they had receivedoral bisphosphonate therapy. There is no evidence of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of thejaw in any of the patients evaluated in the clinic and those contacted by phone or e-mail reported nosymptoms. Of the 468 implants, all but 2 integrated fully and meet criteria for establishing implantsuccess. Implant success rates were comparable for patients receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy andthose not receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy.Conclusions: Guidelines for treatment of dental patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonate treatmentsshould be different than for patients taking the oral formulations of these medications. In this study, oralbisphosphonate therapy did not appear to significantly affect implant success. Implant surgery on patientsreceiving bisphosphonate therapy did not result in bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw.Nevertheless, sufficient evidence exists to suggest that all patients undergoing implant placement should bequestioned about bisphosphonate therapy including the drug taken, the dosage, and length of treatment priorto surgery. For patients having a history of oral bisphosphonate treatment exceeding 3 years and those havingconcomitant treatment with prednisone, additional testing and alternate treatment options should be con-sidered.© 2008 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeonsJ Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:223-230, 2008