Paracetamol (acetaminophen) route in palliative care (PC) patients: Intravenous versus subcutaneous route pharmacokinetics study protocol for a randomized pilot trial = ParaSCIVPallia

doi:10.21203/rs.2.14232/v1

Download PDF

Study protocol

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) route in palliative care (PC) patients: Intravenous versus subcutaneous route pharmacokinetics study protocol for a randomized pilot trial = ParaSCIVPallia

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.14232/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 04 Feb, 2020

Read the published version in Trials →

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

Background :Among palliative care patients, the subcutaneous route is often an alternative to the intravenous route, yet pharmacological and clinical data are lacking. Many French palliative teams are now empirically using paracetamol by the subcutaneous route, but there are no data to support this practice.

Aim :Compare pharmacokinetic parameters between the intravenous and subcutaneous routes for PC patients.

Design : A randomized, open, crossover study in two palliative care centres. The primary endpoints are AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, Cmax, and Vd et t1/2. All adverse events will be reported for a safety analysis. Setting/participants 20 adult palliative care patients with an IV device, having spontaneous pain, not related to care, with a numeric pain rate scale > 3/10, or having a systematic prescription of paracetamol in the usual treatment. They also have to meet all eligibility criteria.

Conclusion : First pilot study comparing paracetamol intravenous versus subcutaneous route pharmacokinetics.

Integrative & Complementary Medicine

Paracetamol

Acetaminophen

Subcutaneous route

Intravenous route

Pharmacokinetics

Palliative-care

In France, paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the first treatment, non-opioid, which is use in the current pain management. This treatment is prescribed in different route of administration for patients according to possibility to take it.

In palliative care, many injectable drugs are used by the subcutaneous (SC) route^1,2to prevent the patient from having a venous track and iterative puncture or for patients with damaged venous access. Many French palliative teams are now empirically using paracetamol by the SC route³. A recent French study carried out by Leheup et al.,³ conducted in 160 patients hospitalized in the PC units of three hospitals in France from 2014 to 2017, evaluated the tolerability of SC paracetamol administration by a prospective multicentre observational study. Of the 160 patients, 44 (28%) presented at least one non-serious local adverse event (oedema in 29, erythema in 5, pain in 15, haematoma in 2, pruritus in 1, and localized inflammation in 2). No serious adverse events were observed. Factors associated with the occurrence of local adverse events were younger age, administration in the arm and thorax, and a high number of daily administrations. At minimum, this study shows a good safety of paracetamol using the SC route.

Sometimes, there is no any other alternative drug or route of administration: excessively poor venous access, no possibility of oral intake, or no possibility of mobilizing the patient for using the intrarectal route. Furthermore, the rectal route has an inconstant biodisponibility.

In the face of this, we built a pilot study to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) of SC and intravenous (IV) routes in the same patient in a palliative care situation, to determine if there is a PK equivalence between these two modes of administration.

The design of this study is based on other PK studies.^4–8

Study Setting

This is a comparative, randomized, open, crossover, bicentre clinical trial (Pain and PC Department of University Hospital and Regional PC Unit, Fondation de la Miséricorde, Caen, France) with SC and IV paracetamol injections successively given to each patient.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

1- Patients ≥ 18 years old, hospitalized

2- Patients in a PC situation

3- Patients having an IV device with the presence of a venous reflux (implantable venous site, PICC line, central track)

4- Patients having spontaneous pain, not related to care, with a numeric pain rate scale (NPRS) > 3/10, or having a systematic prescription of paracetamol in the usual treatment

5- Patients able to do an auto-evaluation of their pain by NPRS

6- No contraindications of paracetamol

7- No contraindications of alternative antalgic (low and strong opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory)

8- Possibility to not take paracetamol in the previous 24 hours before inclusion

9- Patients with a blood test dating back less than 7 days, without severe renal (DFG > 30 or hepatic failure (SGPT/SGOT > 350 UI/L, Bilirubin > 40 µmol/L, TP <50%)

10- Patients related with a French social security regime

11- Patients accept to participate in the study, with written consent

Exclusion criteria

1- Patients under legal protection

2- Patients who participate in another study less than 30 days before

3- Patients weighing less than 50 kg

4- Patients having a contraindication to the SC route

5- Pregnant or breastfeeding woman

6- Patients having a paracetamol administration less than 24 hours before the beginning of the inclusion

7- Patients having a low opioid less than 2 hours before or a strong opioid less than one hour before the beginning of administration of paracetamol

8- Patients having a fever

9- No possibility of communication

Experimental Plan / Intervention

Patients will be screened by investigators according to eligibility criteria. Patients will be randomly assigned (by using an informatic software) to SC before IV route paracetamol injection or IV before SC with a washout period of 24 hours between the injections.

Protocol Steps

The study design is described in figure 1

Figure 1:Study design

All steps are resumed in table 1, with the SPIRIT advice.

Pre-inclusion:

Patients will be screened by investigators according to eligibility criteria. Patients will sign a consent form after receiving oral and written information from a physician investigator involved in this project.

After inclusion, they will be randomly assigned (by using Ennov clinical® software) to SC before IV route paracetamol injection or IV before SC with a washout period of 24 hours between the injections.

Inclusion:

Day (D) -1

- Verification of eligibility criteria

- Explanation of the study to patients: information about predictable modalities, constraints and risks of the study

- Collect the signed consent

- Informatic Randomization (Group SC-IV or Iv-SC)

- Stop paracetamol

- Alternative antalgics prescription

Day (D) 0:

- Collect the patient characteristics: Temperature; Weight; Size; Gender, Liver and kidney history, Main disease.

- Collect all current treatments

- Adapt pain management treatment and if the patient has paracetamol in his treatment, the practitioner has to prescribe alternative antalgics

- Plan for collection of alternative antalgics from D-1 to D2: hours of administration; dosage.

- First blood test: Albumin, Liver function tests (glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase serum (SGOT), glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGPT), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT); alkaline phosphatase); kidney function tests (creatinine, glomerular filtration rate (GFR)), human chorionic-gonadotropin, beta subunit (βhCG) (only childbearing woman).

D1:

- Dosage of paracetamol in blood before any administration (=TO). The blood sample has to be done at the precise timetable specified in the protocol.

-Administration of 1000 mg of paracetamol, by the first route of administration designated by randomization and with infusion pump Volumat® or Volumed® at the rate of 100 ml in 30 min (200 mL/hour).

-Carry out blood quantitative analysis of paracetamol, according to the following parameters and depending on the route done first:

- IV way: (after paracetamol administration and every blood puncture, rinsing the central track by 10 mL of physiological serum) 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 and 8 hours

-SC way: (after every blood puncture, rinsing the central track by 10 mL of physiological serum): 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours.

-At each blood test, the patient will undergo a NPRS and an assessment of the tolerance.

D2:

Twenty-four hours after first administration of paracetamol (washout)

The patient will receive paracetamol by the second route of administration according to the randomization in the same timeline as D1.

In any moment, if pain is not well controlled, the investigator practitioner has to prescribe alternative drugs, and all treatment that he will consider necessary to obtain relief. Any adverse events, other unidentified effects of trial intervention and any alternative drugs used have to be listed in the electronic Case Report Form (eCRF) of the patient and declared to the promoter, following the procedure described in the protocol.

Ending-Protocol Visit:

Every Patient will have an exam on the fourth and the thirtieth day of the protocol for safety monitoring of the subcutaneous route of administration. In case of adverse events, long term monitoring will be proposed and a specialist opinion will be requested if the investigating physician or the promoter deems it necessary.

Visits	VS (D-1)	VI (D0)	V1 (D1)	V2 (D2)	V4 (D4)	V6 (D30)
Collect the eligibility criteria	X	X
Informed consent		X
Collect patients’ characteristics		X
Allocation (IV-SC or SC-IV)		X
First blood test		X
Paracetamol IV administration			X or	X
Paracetamol SC Administration			X or	X
Plasmatic paracetamol concentrations			X	X
Prescription of alternative pain drugs	X	X	X	X
Temperature		X	X	X
Central track monitoring			X	X
Pain monitoring		X	X	X	X	X
Tolerance monitoring			X	X	X	X
Adverse events monitoring		X	X	X	X	X

Table 1: Protocol Steps and Intervention-SPIRIT Figure

Outcomes

The main objective is to demonstrate a PK equivalence between the two modes of administration. The secondary objectives are to compare the efficacy of the two modes of administration on pain and to explore global and cutaneous tolerance of paracetamol used by the SC route.

The main judgement test will be the blood concentration of paracetamol.

Curves will be established for each patient, and we’ll determine and compare for each route of administration and for each patient AUC0-t, AUC0-¥, Cmax, and Vd et t1/2. Data will also permit us to compare PK characteristics between all of the patients.

Secondary evaluation criteria will be the pain evaluation by NPRS throughout the duration of the protocol, and the evaluation of safety by the nurse.

Data Collection Methods

Every participant will be assigned a unique electronic- Case Report Form (eCRF).

Pharmacokinetic Data

Pharmacokinetic sampling procedure.

Blood samples (2 ml) will be collected in dry tubes free of gel at 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 4 and 8 hours after paracetamol intravenous administration or 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours after SC administration. They will be rapidly transported to the laboratory.

Assay method.

After centrifugation, serum samples will be immediately used for quantification of acetaminophen with the EMIT tox TM Acetaminophen Assay, which is a homogeneous enzyme immunoassay performed in AU 5800 clinical chemistry systems (Beckman Coulter, France). The limit of quantification is 0.12 mg/L. Precision is better than 6% for three quality control levels.

Pharmacokinetic calculations.

Paracetamol concentrations obtained after IV and subcutaneous administration will be analysed using a 1-compartment open model. The apparent first-order rate constant (ke) and the corresponding apparent elimination half-life (t1/2 = Ln2/ke) will be determined by least squares regression analysis of the terminal phase of the serum concentration-time curve. The apparent first-order rate constant (ka) and the corresponding apparent resorption half-life (t1/2 = Ln2/ka) will be determined by least squares regression analysis of the resorption phase from the serum concentration-time curve obtained after subcutaneous administration. The maximum observed serum concentration (Cmax) and the time required to reach Cmax (Tmax) will be calculated using the following formula: Tmax = Ln(Ka/Ke) / (Ka-Ke) and Cmax=C0.(e-Ke.Tmax- e-Ka.Tmax). The AUC 0-infinity will be calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule over the interval of 0 to 8 h (AUC -8 h) and extrapolated to infinity with the following equation: AUC 0-infinity = AUC 0-8 h + C8 h/ke. The bioavailability (f) corresponds to the ratio AUC 0-infinity (after SC administration) / AUC 0-infinity (after IV administration). The volume of distribution will be evaluated with the equations Vd = D/C0 (IV) and Vd = f.D/C0 (SC). The total clearance (CL) will be calculated from the equation CL = Ke.Vd.

Adverse Events Data

All adverse events will be collected, from consent to the end of patient participation, and reported to the sponsor. Serious adverse reactions (SAR) will be qualified as expected or unexpected by the sponsor. Expected SAR related to paracetamol are thrombocytopenia, leucopenia, neutropenia, hypersensitivity, hypotension, increased transaminases, malaise, tachycardia, flushing, pruritus and erythema. Other SAR will be considered as unexpected.

A Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will review the safety independently. The DSMB will include three experts: one pharmacologist, one physician pain specialist, and one dermatologist. The sponsor will request DSMB advice in case of Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reaction or any new safety information. The DSMB is charged with providing advices to the sponsor recommendations that include (a) continuation of the study, (b) continuation with modification, and (c) termination of the study.

Data Analysis

The following PK parameters: AUC0-t, AUC0-¥, Cmax, Vd, and T1/2, whose distributions are known to be approximately log-normal, will be described for the 2 modes of administration in the form of geometric means with geometric coefficients of variation. Tmax will be summarized by a median and quartiles.

The parameters AUC0-t, AUC0-¥, Cmax, Vd and T1/2 will then be log-transformed and compared between the 2 modes of administration using a linear regression model taking into account the following effects: treatment sequence (IV – SC or SC – IV), subjects (nested in the treatment sequence), treatment period (period 1 or period 2) and treatment (mode of administration: IV or SC). For each parameter, the difference between the two modes of administration will be tested, based on the P-value associated with the treatment effect. A non-parametric test (Wilcoxon signed-rank test) will be used for Tmax.

The bioequivalence between the 2 modes of administration will be tested for AUC0-t, AUC0-¥ and Cmax, based on the 90% confidence interval of the ratio of the geometric means (SC vs IV). According to the recommendations of the European Medicines Agency,⁹ we can conclude bioequivalence if the confidence interval is fully within the range [80%-125%].

Pain scores will be compared between the 2 modes of administration by paired T-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, depending on the form of the distribution.

Statistical significance will be set at P < 0.05. Data will be analysed at the Biostatistics and Clinical Research Unit of Caen University Hospital, with SPSS and R software.

Sample Size

No sample size calculations were performed due to the pilot nature of the study. Furthermore, we could not find any information in the literature on the variability of PK parameters in a palliative care population.

We therefore relied on the number of subjects included in clinical studies with a similar methodology^4,10–13 and decided to include 20 patients. This number is also in line with the recommendations of the European Medicines Agency⁹ which sets at ¹² the minimum number of patients to be included in a bioequivalence trial.

Many drugs could be administered by SC route in palliative care^1,2. For antalgic drugs, strong and low opioids are currently used by the subcutaneous route, with an equivalence dose from the IV route calculated according to well-known conversion factors.¹⁴

However, there is no study highlighting the equivalence, efficacy and safety of paracetamol administered subcutaneously. Currently, increasingly more palliative care teams empirically choose to use this method of administration for patients with an impossible venous or oral route. PC practitioners need more evidence-based data, particularly for frail patients. In these situations, it is difficult to extrapolate from studies in other populations.

Our palliative care study evaluated the pharmacokinetic equivalence between SC and IV route. It could help to determine whether the SC route is a good alternative method of administration for paracetamol. The risks of this method of administration in patients are defects of analgesia, technical problems with the central venous catheter, the appearance of skin lesions and the toxicity of paracetamol. These risks will be controlled by the establishment of increased clinical surveillance and the setting up of preventive care (rinsing the venous pathway, prescribing an alternative analgesic treatment, etc.).

Our study is the first pharmacokinetic analysis of subcutaneous administration of paracetamol. Our principal limit is the sample size that does not allow us to conclude on the criteria of pain relief and tolerance.

The ethics committee/institutional approval show that pharmacokinetic clinical trials can be carried out for PC patients.

If an equivalence between the SC and IV routes for palliative care patients is demonstrated, paracetamol may be used by palliative care teams in a more consensual, secure and scientifically proven way. However, more studies will be necessary to confirm the clinical efficiency.

Protocol version number 3 : 04/12/2018. Recruitement begin in april 2019 and will probably be completed in april 2021.

GFR: glomerular filtration rate;

GGT: gamma-Glutamyltransferase;

IV: intravenous;

NPRS: Numeric Pain Rate Scale;

PC : palliative care

PK: Pharmacokinetic;

RPCU: Regional Palliative Care Unit;

SC: subcutaneous;

SGOT: glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase serum;

SGPT: glutamic pyruvic transaminase;

βhCG: human chorionic-gonadotropin, beta subunit

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Committee for the protection of persons (CPP) 18.09.05.58206 approval 2018/10/4
National Drug Safety Agency (ANSM: Agence Nationale de Sécurité Médicament) MEDAECNAT-2018-09-00009 approval 2018/11/29

A consent letter will be signed by each patient included.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

Anonymized data can be made available to investigators upon request to the corresponding author.

Competing interests :

The authors declare that they have no competing interests

Funding:

The funding is carried out by the CHU of Caen as part of a call for projects for Young hospital researchers. The whole study is funded through this.

Author’s Contributions:

MV, ML and CG had the idea for this study. ML will be a coordinator of the study. MV, ML, LPSP, SG plan to supervise data acquisition and will be responsible for creation and quality of the database. CC and VLB will be responsible for statistical analysis. AA is responsible of IMP circuit. MV, ML and CG drafted the manuscript. MV and ML prepared the final version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements:

The authors would like to acknowledge the University Hospital Center of Caen for supporting our research project, both in terms of acting as the research sponsor and providing financial support. The authors also acknowledge the clinical research associates, in particular Blandine Lecrux, François Fournel and Blaizot Gaetane of the Research Unit, for managing the setting up and conduct of this study.

Fonzo-Christe C, Vukasovic C, Wasilewski-Rasca AF, et al. Subcutaneous administration of drugs in the elderly: survey of practice and systematic literature review. Palliat Med 2005; 19: 208–219.
Bruera E, Legris MA, Kuehn N, et al. Hypodermoclysis for the administration of fluids and narcotic analgesics in patients with advanced cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 1990; 5: 218–220.
Leheup BF, Ducousso S, Picard S, et al. Subcutaneous administration of paracetamol-good local tolerability in palliative care patients: an observational study. Palliat Med 2018; 32: 1216–1221.
Guzman NA, Molina DR, Nunez BF, et al. Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetic evaluation study of acetaminophen vs. acetaminophen plus caffeine tablets in healthy mexican volunteers. Drugs R D 2016; 16: 339–345.
Bartz L, Klein C, Seifert A, et al. Subcutaneous administration of drugs in palliative care: results of a systematic observational study. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014; 48: 540–547.
Yi S, Chung YJ, Kim TE, et al. Pharmacokinetics of extended-release versus conventional tramadol/acetaminophen fixed-dose combination tablets: an open-label, 2-treatment, multiple-dose, randomized-sequence crossover study in healthy korean male volunteers. Clin Ther 2011; 33: 728–737.
Palma-Aguirre JA, Villalpando-Hernandez J, Novoa-Heckel G, et al. Bioavailability of two oral-tablet and two oral-suspension formulations of naproxen sodium/paracetamol (acetaminophen): single-dose, randomized, open-label, two-period crossover comparisons in healthy Mexican adult subjects. Clin Ther 2009; 31: 399–410.
O'Neal JB, Freiberg AA, Yelle MD, et al. Intravenous vs oral acetaminophen as an adjunct to multimodal analgesia after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 3029–3033.
EMEA. Guideline on the investigation of bioequivalence, CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98 Rev. London: European Medical Agency, 2010.
Oosten AW, Abrantes JA, Jonsson S, et al. A prospective population pharmacokinetic study on morphine metabolism in cancer patients. Clin Pharmacokinet 2017; 56: 733–746.
Allegaert K, Olkkola KT, Owens KH, et al. Covariates of intravenous paracetamol pharmacokinetics in adults. BMC Anesthesiol 2014; 14: 77.
Lynch PM, Butler J, Huerta D, et al. A pharmacokinetic and tolerability evaluation of two continuous subcutaneous infusion systems compared to an oral controlled-release morphine. J Pain Symptom Manage 2000; 19: 348–356.
Kawade RM, Burade KB, Ghiware NB, et al. Evaluation of bioequivalence and pharmacokinetic studies of two formulation of paracetamol ER 650 mg in healthy adult volunteers. World J Pharm Pharm Sci 2013; 2: 5449–5458.
Kraychete DC and Sakata RK. Use and rotation of opioids in chronic non-oncologic pain. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2012; 62: 554–562.

supplement1.doc

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 04 Feb, 2020

Read the published version in Trials →

Editorial decision: Minor revision
04 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received at journal
02 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed at journal
01 Nov, 2019
Review #2 received at journal
01 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited by journal
31 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed at journal
31 Oct, 2019
Editor assigned by journal
10 Sep, 2019
First submitted to journal
05 Sep, 2019
Submission checks completed at journal
05 Sep, 2019

You are reading this older preprint version

Read the latest preprint version →

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) route in palliative care (PC) patients: Intravenous versus subcutaneous route pharmacokinetics study protocol for a randomized pilot trial = ParaSCIVPallia

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods and designs

Study Setting

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion criteria

Experimental Plan / Intervention

Protocol Steps

Outcomes

Data Collection Methods

Pharmacokinetic Data

Adverse Events Data

Data Analysis

Sample Size

Discussion

Conclusion

Trial status

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1