Cited by 169Pain Management and Opioid UseAnesthesia and Pain ManagementOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

APOLLO-1: a randomized placebo and active-controlled phase III study investigating oliceridine (TRV130), a G protein-biased ligand at the µ-opioid receptor, for management of moderate-to-severe acute pain following bunionectomy

Open access
Viscusi, Eugene R, Skobieranda, Franck, Soergel, David G, Cook, Emily, Burt, David A, Singla, Neil·2019·Journal of Pain Research

Abstract

Purpose: Oliceridine is a novel G protein-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist designed to provide intravenous (IV) analgesia with a lower risk of opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs) than conventional opioids. Patients and methods: APOLLO-1 (NCT02815709) was a phase III, double-blind, randomized trial in patients with moderate-to-severe pain following bunionectomy. Patients received a loading dose of either placebo, oliceridine (1.5 mg), or morphine (4 mg), followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg oliceridine, 1 mg morphine, or placebo). The primary endpoint compared the proportion of treatment responders through 48 hours for oliceridine regimens and placebo. Secondary outcomes included a composite measure of respiratory safety burden (RSB, representing the cumulative duration of respiratory safety events) and the proportion of treatment responders vs morphine. Results: Effective analgesia was observed for all oliceridine regimens, with responder rates of 50%, 62%, and 65.8% in the 0.1 mg, 0.35 mg, and 0.5 mg regimens, respectively (all P <0.0001 vs placebo [15.2%]; 0.35 mg and 0.5 mg non-inferior to morphine). RSB showed a ose-dependent increase across oliceridine regimens (mean hours [SD]: 0.1 mg: 0.04 [0.33]; 0.35 mg: 0.28 [1.11]; 0.5 mg: 0.8 [3.33]; placebo: 0 [0]), but none were statistically different from morphine (1.1 [3.03]). Gastrointestinal adverse events also increased in a dose-dependent manner in oliceridine regimens (0.1 mg: 40.8%; 0.35 mg: 59.5%; 0.5 mg: 70.9%; placebo: 24.1%; morphine: 72.4%). The odds ratio for rescue antiemetic use was significantly lower for oliceridine regimens compared to morphine ( P <0.05). Conclusion: Oliceridine is a novel and effective IV analgesic providing rapid analgesia for the relief of moderate-to-severe acute postoperative pain compared to placebo. Additionally, it has a favorable safety and tolerability profile with regard to respiratory and gastrointestinal adverse effects compared to morphine, and may provide a new treatment option for patients with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain where an IV opioid is required. Keywords: postoperative, analgesia, patient controlled, clinical trial, orthopedic surgery

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 · 10.2147/jpr.s171013

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Oliceridine is a biased μ-opioid receptor ligand with comparable analgesic effects to morphine.

    “Oliceridine is a biased µ-opioid receptor ligand with comparable analgesic effects to morphine”

    From Irritable bowel syndrome (2020) · cites this paper as [147]

  • There are no human studies of oliceridine in visceral pain.

    “although there are, as yet, no human studies in visceral pain”

    From Irritable bowel syndrome (2020) · cites this paper as [147]

    The Introduction describes human studies in healthy volunteers and patients undergoing bunionectomy or abdominoplasty, but does not address whether any human studies of oliceridine in visceral pain existed. A search for visceral pain and abdominal pain found no passage establishing that absence. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Viscusi, E. R., Skobieranda, F., Soergel, D. G., Cook, E., Burt, D. A., & Singla, N.
Affiliations
  • Thomas Jefferson University (US)
  • Trevena, Inc. (United States) (US)
  • Lotus Clinical Research (US)
Corresponding author
Viscusi, Eugene R
Venue
Journal of Pain Research
Published
2019-03
Volume
Volume 12
Pages
927-943
ISSN
1178-7090 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2921387917
Cited by
167
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 12
FWCI
32.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons
  • American Pain Society
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
oliceridine, TRV130, mu-opioid receptor agonists, postoperative pain, bunionectomy, morphine, patient-controlled analgesia, opioid side effects, respiratory safety, gastrointestinal adverse effects, antiemetic use, analgesic efficacy, dose-response relationship, non-inferiority, intravenous analgesia

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