At the recruitment visit, the transdermal buprenorphine patch in these patients was replaced by a 25 μg/h transdermal fentanyl patch, positioned at different skin LY2606368 research buy site on the thorax, arm or back. The BTDS group were patients at the screening visit who had taken fentanyl TTS 75 μg/h and suffered side-effects and refractory pain and had taken this dose continuously during the pre-recruitment week. The transdermal fentanyl patch in these patients was replaced by a 52.5 μg/h transdermal buprenorphine patch, positioned at different skin site on the thorax, arm

or back. Rescue medication with 20 mg of immediate-release oral morphine was prescribed to each patient up to three times a day. At the end of the recruitment visit (V1) all the patients were asked to return after one week for selleck the first control visit (V2), and to continue keeping their daily diaries. Assessment of analgesic efficacy Mean weekly pain on the basis of the VAS scores in diaries (VAS 0 = no pain to VAS 100 = intolerable pain) was recorded throughout the 4 week period. The Present Pain Intensity (PPI, 0 = no pain, 1 = mild, 2 = discomforting, 3 = distressing, 4 = horrible, 5 = excruciating) and Pain Rating Index (PRI) were assessed during each visit from V1 to V4. The PRI was taken from the Short-Form Mc Gill Pain Questionnaire and comprised 15 items investigating both the sensorial (11 items) and the emotional sphere

of pain (4 items) with a score from 0 to 3 for each item (0–45). In all cases the necessity of rescue medication was registered as milligrams

of oral morphine per day. Another parameter taken into consideration was the patients’ satisfaction with the new therapy. It was evaluated by means of the simple question: “”Are you satisfied with your analgesic treatment?”" The patients could answer only “”Yes/No”". The primary efficacy measure was pain reduction as recorded by patients both in a daily dairy using VAS and during the visits by PPI and PRI. The secondary efficacy measure was the reduction of rescue mediation consumption as milligrams of IR oral morphine per day. Assessment of adverse events In all patients, the presence (Yes) or absence (No) of AEs was evaluated and recorded in response to questions posed for nausea and/or vomiting, constipation, and dysphoria. The level of sedation was evaluated by a 4-point scale (0 = no sedation, Branched chain aminotransferase 1 = slight sedation, 2 = moderate sedation, 3 = severe sedation). Statistical analysis For each of the two treatment groups, a paired Student t test was used to compare the mean values of the primary efficacy parameters (VAS, PPI, and PRI) and rescue medication consumption for the same patients measured at Visits 2, 3, and 4 compared to baseline values (Visit 1). A Student t test for independent variables was used to compare the two independent treatment groups. Results In total, 40 Caucasian patients were screened and 32 were enrolled. All the enrolled patients completed the study.