Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP), commonly encountered in clinical practice, may be cancer-related, namely resulting from nervous system tumor invasion, surgical nerve damage during tumor removal, radiation-induced nerve damage and chemotherapy-related neuropathy, or may be of benign origin, unrelated to cancer. A neuropathic component is evident in about 1/3 of cancer pain cases.Although from a pathophysiological perspective NCP may differ from chronic neuropathic pain (NP), such as noncancer-related pain, clinical practice, and limited publications have shown that these two pain entities may share some treatment modalities. For example, co-analgesics have been well integrated into cancer pain-management strategies and are often used as First-Line options for the treatment of NCP. These drugs, including antidepressants and anticonvulsants, are recommended by evidence-based guidelines, whereas, others such as lidocaine patch 5%, are supported by randomized, controlled, clinical data and are included in guidelines for restricted conditions treatment. The vast majority of these drugs have already been proven useful in the management of benign NP syndromes. Treatment decisions for patients with NP can be difficult. The intrinsic difficulties in performing randomized controlled trials in cancer pain have traditionally justified the acceptance of drugs already known to be effective in benign NP for the management of malignant NP, despite the lack of relevant high quality data. Interest in NCP mechanisms and pharmacotherapy has increased, resulting in significant mechanism-based treatment advances for the future. In this comprehensive review, we present the latest knowledge regarding NCP pharmacological management. n INTRODUCTIONFollowing EFIC's (European Federation of IASP Chapters) declaration in 2001, pain is not a symptom but a disease in its own right, necessitating appropriate treatment. The word pain usually refers to a discrete sensory experience, triggered by an identifiable set of ''painful'' stimuli, acting on a unique or stable ''pain'' pathway and eliciting an invariant sensation. However, pain, and particularly neuropathic pain (NP) can also exist as a diverse group of complex phenomena of unpleasant and distressing nature. NP encloses numerous complicated neurobiologic constituents and reflects potentially dynamic mechanisms, interacting at multiple neuraxial sites. 1Modern neurobiological techniques have led to tremendous progress in the exploration of pain pathogenetic mechanisms. [2][3][4] Research indicates that pain can be produced in multiple ways, at different locations, co-existing between and across various pathological conditions. 5,6 Novel therapeutic targets have been discovered and are used by the pharmaceutical industry for the construction of highly specific molecules, acting as potential innovative analgesics. Recent targets' application, specific to precise NP mechanisms, will very soon enable treatment to be focused at particular mechanisms, introducing a mechanism-based therap...
Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP), commonly encountered in clinical practice, may be cancer-related, namely resulting from nervous system tumor invasion, surgical nerve damage during tumor removal, radiation-induced nerve damage and chemotherapy-related neuropathy, or may be of benign origin, unrelated to cancer. A neuropathic component is evident in about 1/3 of cancer pain cases.Although from a pathophysiological perspective NCP may differ from chronic neuropathic pain (NP), such as noncancer-related pain, clinical practice, and limited publications have shown that these two pain entities may share some treatment modalities. For example, co-analgesics have been well integrated into cancer pain-management strategies and are often used as First-Line options for the treatment of NCP. These drugs, including antidepressants and anticonvulsants, are recommended by evidence-based guidelines, whereas, others such as lidocaine patch 5%, are supported by randomized, controlled, clinical data and are included in guidelines for restricted conditions treatment. The vast majority of these drugs have already been proven useful in the management of benign NP syndromes. Treatment decisions for patients with NP can be difficult. The intrinsic difficulties in performing randomized controlled trials in cancer pain have traditionally justified the acceptance of drugs already known to be effective in benign NP for the management of malignant NP, despite the lack of relevant high quality data. Interest in NCP mechanisms and pharmacotherapy has increased, resulting in significant mechanism-based treatment advances for the future. In this comprehensive review, we present the latest knowledge regarding NCP pharmacological management. n INTRODUCTIONFollowing EFIC's (European Federation of IASP Chapters) declaration in 2001, pain is not a symptom but a disease in its own right, necessitating appropriate treatment. The word pain usually refers to a discrete sensory experience, triggered by an identifiable set of ''painful'' stimuli, acting on a unique or stable ''pain'' pathway and eliciting an invariant sensation. However, pain, and particularly neuropathic pain (NP) can also exist as a diverse group of complex phenomena of unpleasant and distressing nature. NP encloses numerous complicated neurobiologic constituents and reflects potentially dynamic mechanisms, interacting at multiple neuraxial sites. 1Modern neurobiological techniques have led to tremendous progress in the exploration of pain pathogenetic mechanisms. [2][3][4] Research indicates that pain can be produced in multiple ways, at different locations, co-existing between and across various pathological conditions. 5,6 Novel therapeutic targets have been discovered and are used by the pharmaceutical industry for the construction of highly specific molecules, acting as potential innovative analgesics. Recent targets' application, specific to precise NP mechanisms, will very soon enable treatment to be focused at particular mechanisms, introducing a mechanism-based therap...
Opiate abuse reportedly can exaggerate complications of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) infection in the central nervous system (CNS), while opiate drugs are often indicated in the treatment of HIV-1-related neuropathic pain. Despite this quandary, few studies have assessed the relationship between the duration or extent of HIV-1 infection and the intrinsic neurobehavioral responsiveness to opioids. To address this problem, doxycycline (DOX)-inducible HIV-Tat1-86 transgenic mice were used as a model for HIV-1-associated neurocognitive disorders, which permitted the regulation of Tat exposure and duration. The effects of continuous Tat induction on the activity of morphine were examined at weekly intervals using standard behavioral assays for nociception and motor function. In the spinal cord, Tat mRNA levels did not increase until the second and third weeks following induction, which corresponded to a significant loss of morphine antinociception as assessed in the tail-flick test. Alternatively, in the striatum, sustained increases in Tat mRNA expression during the second week of induction coincided with significant decreases in rotarod performance and interactions with morphine. Importantly, the behavioral effects of morphine differed depending on the timing and location of Tat expression; with increases in Tat transcript levels in the spinal cord and striatum corresponding to significant alterations in morphine-dependent nociception and rotarod performance, respectively. Assuming Tat levels contribute to the clinical manifestations of HIV-1, the results suggest that regional differences in viral load and opioid phenotype might influence the nature and degree that opiate responsiveness is altered in HIV-1 infected individuals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.