CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 420Pain Management and Opioid UseCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPain Mechanisms and Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nabiximols for Opioid-Treated Cancer Patients With Poorly-Controlled Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Graded-Dose Trial

Open access
Portenoy, Russell K., Ganae-Motan, Elena Doina, Allende, Silvia, Yanagihara, Ronald, Shaiova, Lauren, Weinstein, Sharon, McQuade, Robert, Wright, Stephen, Fallon, Marie T.·2012·The Journal of Pain
DOI 10.1016/j.jpain.2012.01.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Unlabelled Patients with advanced cancer who have pain that responds poorly to opioid therapy pose a clinical challenge. Nabiximols (Nabiximols is the U.S. Adopted Name [USAN] for Sativex [GW Pharma Ltd, Wiltshire, U.K.], which does not yet have an INN), a novel cannabinoid formulation, is undergoing investigation as add-on therapy for this population. In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study, patients with advanced cancer and opioid-refractory pain received placebo or nabiximols at a low dose (1-4 sprays/day), medium dose (6-10 sprays/day), or high dose (11-16 sprays/day). Average pain, worst pain and sleep disruption were measured daily during 5 weeks of treatment; other questionnaires measured quality of life and mood. A total of 360 patients were randomized; 263 completed. There were no baseline differences across groups. The 30% responder rate primary analysis was not significant for nabiximols versus placebo (overall P = .59). A secondary continuous responder analysis of average daily pain from baseline to end of study demonstrated that the proportion of patients reporting analgesia was greater for nabiximols than placebo overall (P = .035), and specifically in the low-dose (P = .008) and medium-dose (P = .039) groups. In the low-dose group, results were similar for mean average pain (P = .006), mean worst pain (P = .011), and mean sleep disruption (P = .003). Other questionnaires showed no significant group differences. Adverse events were dose-related and only the high-dose group compared unfavorably with placebo. This study supports the efficacy and safety of nabiximols at the 2 lower-dose levels and provides important dose information for future trials.Perspective Nabiximols, a novel cannabinoid formulation, may be a useful add-on analgesic for patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study demonstrated efficacy and safety at low and medium doses.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpain.2012.01.003

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 34 references

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 420

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Portenoy, R. K., Ganae-Motan, E. D., Allende, S., Yanagihara, R., Shaiova, L., Weinstein, S., McQuade, R., Wright, S., & Fallon, M. T.
Affiliations
  • Mount Sinai Beth Israel (US)
  • Metropolitan Hospital Center (US)
  • Huntsman Cancer Institute (US)
  • Otsuka (United States) (US)
  • GW Pharmaceuticals (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Edinburgh Cancer Research (GB)
Corresponding author
Portenoy, Russell K.
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Pain
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-05
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
438-449
ISSN
1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpain.2012.01.003
OpenAlex
W2113421289
Cited by
420
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
19.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Huntsman Cancer Foundation
  • GW Pharmaceuticals
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
nabiximols, Sativex, cannabinoid therapy, advanced cancer, dose-response relationship, sleep disruption, quality of life, mood, adverse events
MeSH terms
Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Cannabidiol, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Pain Measurement, Dronabinol, Time Factors, Analgesics, Non-Narcotic, Chronic Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review