Minimal contribution of P-gp on the low brain distribution of naldemedine, a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist

Minimal Involvement of P-gp and BCRP in Oral Absorption of Ensitrelvir, An Oral SARS-CoV-2 3C-like Protease Inhibitor, in a Non-Clinical Investigation

P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) are important transporters causing drug-drug interaction (DDI). Here, we investigated the involvement of P-gp and BCRP in the oral absorption of ensitrelvir in non-clinical studies and estimated the DDI risk mediated by P-gp and BCRP inhibition in humans. Although ensitrelvir is an in vitro P-gp and BCRP substrate, it demonstrated high bioavailability in rats and monkeys after oral administration. Plasma exposures of ensitrelvir following oral administration were comparable in wild type (WT) and Bcrp (-/-) mice. On the other hand, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) ratio of ensitrelvir in the Mdr1a/1b (-/-) mice to the WT mice was 1.92, indicating that P-gp, but not BCRP, was involved in the oral absorption of ensitrelvir. Based on our previous retrospective analyses, such a low AUC ratio (<3) in the Mdr1a/1b (-/-) mice indicates a minimal impact of P-gp on the oral absorption in humans. In conclusion, our studies demonstrate that the involvement of both P-gp and BCRP in the oral absorption of ensitrelvir is minimal, and suggest that ensitrelvir has a low risk for DDIs mediated by P-gp and BCRP inhibition in humans.

Naldemedine versus placebo in opioid-induced constipation: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a frequent adverse event among patients receiving chronic pain therapy that is requiring opioids. Naldemedine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat OIC and appears to be more efficient than any other peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist. This meta-analysis aimed at assessing the available data on naldemedine in terms of efficacy.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and ClinicalTrials on 24 May 2022 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing naldemedine to placebo among patients reporting OIC.

RESULTS

Evaluation of 6 RCTs enrolling 2769 participants showed significantly greater respondence to treatment (OR=2.48; 95% CI: 2.02 to 3.06; p<0.00001), change in weekly spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) (mean difference=1.45; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.76; p<0.00001), complete SBMs (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.17; p<0.00001) and SBMs without straining (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.17; p<0.00001) for patients treated with naldemedine. We found no difference in numeric pain rating scales after one (mean difference=0.05; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.31; p=0.73) and two weeks of treatment (mean difference= -0.04; 95% CI: -0.31 to 0.22; p=0.75). Funding and clinical diversity were possible risks of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Naldemedine improves a variety of bowel function parameters while preserving analgesia, confirming its efficacy for patients with OIC. However, head-to-head trials are needed to establish naldemedine as treatment of first choice for laxative-refractory OIC.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022281353.

Influence of Brain Metastasis on Analgesia-Related Outcomes in Patients with Lung and Breast Cancers Treated with Naldemedine: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Naldemedine is structurally designed to prevent passage across the blood-brain barrier (BBB), resulting in the attenuation of opioid-induced constipation without interfering with the analgesic effects of opioids. However, the influence of brain metastasis (BM), as one indicator of BBB disruption, on the analgesic effects of opioids in patients treated with naldemedine remains unclear. To examine whether the analgesic effects of opioids following naldemedine treatment are lower in patients with BM than in those without BM, we surveyed inpatients with lung and breast cancers treated with naldemedine at Fujita Health University Hospital between April 2017 and March 2022. Changes in the numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), and the number of rescues were assessed as analgesia-related outcomes during the first 7 days of naldemedine treatment in patients with or without BM, matched by the propensity score. In total, 172 patients were enrolled. After propensity-score matching, 30 patients with BM and 60 patients without BM were included in the analysis. Changes in NRS scores, MMEs, and the number of rescues did not differ between patients with and without BM. In the linear mixed-effects model, the coefficient of interaction between patients with or without BM and the days for each outcome was not statistically significant. BM does not influence the analgesic effect of opioids in patients with lung and breast cancers treated with naldemedine. Naldemedine may be useful for treating BM.

ABCB1 and ABCG2 Regulation at the Blood-Brain Barrier: Potential New Targets to Improve Brain Drug Delivery

The drug efflux transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2 at the blood-brain barrier limit the delivery of drugs into the brain. Strategies to overcome ABCB1/ABCG2 have been largely unsuccessful, which poses a tremendous clinical problem to successfully treat central nervous system (CNS) diseases. Understanding basic transporter biology, including intracellular regulation mechanisms that control these transporters, is critical to solving this clinical problem.In this comprehensive review, we summarize current knowledge on signaling pathways that regulate ABCB1/ABCG2 at the blood-brain barrier. In Section I, we give a historical overview on blood-brain barrier research and introduce the role that ABCB1 and ABCG2 play in this context. In Section II, we summarize the most important strategies that have been tested to overcome the ABCB1/ABCG2 efflux system at the blood-brain barrier. In Section III, the main component of this review, we provide detailed information on the signaling pathways that have been identified to control ABCB1/ABCG2 at the blood-brain barrier and their potential clinical relevance. This is followed by Section IV, where we explain the clinical implications of ABCB1/ABCG2 regulation in the context of CNS disease. Lastly, in Section V, we conclude by highlighting examples of how transporter regulation could be targeted for therapeutic purposes in the clinic. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The ABCB1/ABCG2 drug efflux system at the blood-brain barrier poses a significant problem to successful drug delivery to the brain. The article reviews signaling pathways that regulate blood-brain barrier ABCB1/ABCG2 and could potentially be targeted for therapeutic purposes.

Simulated Microgravity Alters P-Glycoprotein Efflux Function and Expression via the Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway in Rat Intestine and Brain

The drug efflux transporter permeability glycoprotein (P-gp) plays an important role in oral drug absorption and distribution. Under microgravity (MG), the changes in P-gp efflux function may alter the efficacy of oral drugs or lead to unexpected effects. Oral drugs are currently used to protect and treat multisystem physiological damage caused by MG; whether P-gp efflux function changes under MG remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the alteration of P-gp efflux function, expression, and potential signaling pathway in rats and cells under different simulated MG (SMG) duration. The altered P-gp efflux function was verified by the in vivo intestinal perfusion and the brain distribution of P-gp substrate drugs. Results showed that the efflux function of P-gp was inhibited in the 7 and 21 day SMG-treated rat intestine and brain and 72 h SMG-treated human colon adenocarcinoma cells and human cerebral microvascular endothelial cells. P-gp protein and gene expression levels were continually down-regulated in rat intestine and up-regulated in rat brain by SMG. P-gp expression was regulated by the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway under SMG, verified by a pathway-specific agonist and inhibitor. The elevated intestinal absorption and brain distribution of acetaminophen levels also confirmed the inhibited P-gp efflux function in rat intestine and brain under SMG. This study revealed that SMG alters the efflux function of P-gp and regulates the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway in the intestine and the brain. These findings may be helpful in guiding the use of P-gp substrate drugs during spaceflight.

The Impact of P-Glycoprotein on Opioid Analgesics: What's the Real Meaning in Pain Management and Palliative Care?

Opioids are widely used in cancer and non-cancer pain management. However, many transporters at the blood-brain barrier (BBB), such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp, ABCB1/MDR1), may impair their delivery to the brain, thus leading to opioid tolerance. Nonetheless, opioids may regulate P-gp expression, thus altering the transport of other compounds, namely chemotherapeutic agents, resulting in pharmacoresistance. Other kinds of painkillers (e.g., acetaminophen, dexamethasone) and adjuvant drugs used for neuropathic pain may act as P-gp substrates and modulate its expression, thus making pain management challenging. Inflammatory conditions are also believed to upregulate P-gp. The role of P-gp in drug-drug interactions is currently under investigation, since many P-gp substrates may also act as substrates for the cytochrome P450 enzymes, which metabolize a wide range of xenobiotics and endobiotics. Genetic variability of the ABCB1/MDR1 gene may be accountable for inter-individual variation in opioid-induced analgesia. P-gp also plays a role in the management of opioid-induced adverse effects, such as constipation. Peripherally acting mu-opioid receptors antagonists (PAMORAs), such as naloxegol and naldemedine, are substrates of P-gp, which prevent their penetration in the central nervous system. In our review, we explore the interactions between P-gp and opioidergic drugs, with their implications in clinical practice.

Possible mechanism for improving the endogenous immune system through the blockade of peripheral μ-opioid receptors by treatment with naldemedine

BACKGROUND

It has been considered that activation of peripheral μ-opioid receptors (MORs) induces side effects of opioids. In this study, we investigated the possible improvement of the immune system in tumour-bearing mice by systemic administration of the peripheral MOR antagonist naldemedine.

METHODS

The inhibitory effect of naldemedine on MOR-mediated signalling was tested by cAMP inhibition and β-arrestin recruitment assays using cultured cells. We assessed possible changes in tumour progression and the number of splenic lymphocytes in tumour-bearing mice under the repeated oral administration of naldemedine.

RESULTS

Treatment with naldemedine produced a dose-dependent inhibition of both the decrease in the cAMP level and the increase in β-arrestin recruitment induced by the MOR agonists. Repeated treatment with naldemedine at a dose that reversed the morphine-induced inhibition of gastrointestinal transport, but not antinociception, significantly decreased tumour volume and prolonged survival in tumour-transplanted mice. Naldemedine administration significantly decreased the increased expression of immune checkpoint-related genes and recovered the decreased level of toll-like receptor 4 in splenic lymphocytes in tumour-bearing mice.

CONCLUSIONS

The blockade of peripheral MOR may induce an anti-tumour effect through the recovery of T-cell exhaustion and promotion of the tumour-killing system.

Update on the role of naldemedine in opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic noncancer pain

Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) affects up to 20% of adults and can interfere with activities of daily living. Up to 4% of adults in the United States receive chronic opioid therapy and up to 57% of patients on long-term opioids for CNCP report opioid-induced constipation (OIC). OIC is essentially constipation occurring after starting opioid treatment. While laxatives are traditionally the first-line therapy for OIC, 81% of patients taking daily laxatives and opioids still reported OIC and considered that it negatively affected their quality of life. Naldemedine is a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORA) approved for the treatment of OIC in patients with CNCP. This article reviews the mechanism of action, efficacy, and safety of naldemedine in CNCP patients. Naldemedine improves OIC in patients with CNCP by acting as an opioid receptor antagonist in the gastrointestinal tract. It does not interfere with the analgesic properties of opioids or cause withdrawal symptoms since these effects are centrally mediated, and naldemedine does not cross the blood brain barrier. Naldemedine showed significant and sustained improvement in frequency of bowel movements, quality of life, and constipation-related symptoms. It is generally well tolerated with a higher incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events of mild or moderate severity such as diarrhea, abdominal pain, or vomiting compared to placebo. While there are no randomized, controlled trials that compare head-to-head pharmacological therapies used for treatment of OIC, network meta-analysis shows that naldemedine has an overall good benefit-risk profile compared to the other approved medications.

Post-marketing surveillance of the safety and effectiveness of naldemedine in the management of opioid-induced constipation in patients with cancer pain in Japan

Purpose

This prospective post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was designed to collect data on the safety and effectiveness of naldemedine in routine clinical practice in patients with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and cancer pain in Japan and explore the characteristics of patients prone to diarrhea.

Methods

The enrolled patients received naldemedine (0.2 mg, once a day) orally for up to 12 weeks. In the safety analysis, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including diarrhea as a special interest, were assessed. Effectiveness was evaluated, especially regarding the frequency and condition of bowel movement.

Results

In the safety analysis set (n = 1177), 145 ADRs occurred in 133 (11.30%) patients, and diarrhea was the most frequent event (n = 107, 9.09%). Most cases of diarrhea were non-serious (98.1%). Most ADRs were non-serious (93.8%), and they resolved within 2 weeks (75.9%). No patient characteristics influenced the risk of diarrhea development or aggravation. Both the frequency (75.0% and 83.2%) and condition of bowel movement (80.0% and 88.0%) were improved at 2 and 12 weeks, respectively in the effectiveness analysis set (n = 953). Frequency and condition of bowel movement were also improved in patients excluded (e.g., Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was ≥ 3) or with very small numbers (e.g., received weak opioid) in the clinical trials.

Conclusions

This PMS indicates that naldemedine is well tolerated and effective in patients of various backgrounds in routine clinical practice who have OIC and cancer pain.

Trial registration

UMIN000042851.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-06807-y.

Naldemedine-induced opioid withdrawal syndrome with severe psychiatric symptoms in an advanced cervical cancer patient without brain metastasis

OBJECTIVE

Naldemedine, an oral peripheral μ-opioid receptor antagonist, was developed for the treatment of constipation, a side effect of opioid use. Naldemedine is not generally recognized as causing opioid withdrawal in which associated symptoms affecting the central nervous system.

METHOD

From the series of cancer patients undergoing symptom management, we report a case treated with naldemedine for constipation in relation to the use of opioids for cancer pain and who displayed severe psychological symptoms associated with withdrawal immediately after the use of naldemedine.

RESULTS

The patient was a 36-year-old woman diagnosed with cervical cancer Stage IIB, PS3. When the patient, who was using oxycodone hydrochloride hydrate (80 mg/day) for ileal pain, was started on naldemedine for constipation, she complained of sweating after just 5 min and hallucinations after 1 h. The patient also displayed physical/behavioral abnormalities such as diarrhea and hyperactivity, and psychological abnormalities such as aggression toward staff.Despite the psychiatric symptoms worsening over time, there were no abnormalities in terms of blood biochemical data, and no brain metastasis was observed on MRI. Based on the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale, these symptoms were judged to indicate opioid withdrawal. Naldemedine was discontinued due to naldemedine-related opioid withdrawal syndrome and, thereafter, the psychiatric symptoms diminished, with no recurrence of similar symptoms observed to date.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

If mental and behavioral abnormalities occur in patients receiving naldemedine, it is necessary to consider the possibility of opioid withdrawal syndrome as a differential diagnosis.

Cyclopropyl Scaffold: A Generalist for Marketed Drugs

In recent decades, much attention has been given to cyclopropyl scaffolds, which commonly exist in natural products and synthetic organic molecules. Clinical drug molecules with cyclopropyl rings are an area of focus in therapeutic research due to their interesting chemical properties and unique pharmacology activity. These molecular drugs against different targets are applicable in some therapeutic treatment fields including cancer, infection, respiratory disorder, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, dysphrenia, nervous system disorders, endocrine and metabolic disorders, skin disease, digestive disorders, urogenital diseases, otolaryngological and dental diseases, and eye diseases. This review is a guide for pharmacologists who are in search of valid preclinical/clinical drug compounds where the progress, from 1961 to the present day, of approved marketed drugs containing cyclopropyl scaffold is examined.

Peripherally acting opioid analgesics and peripherally-induced analgesia

The management of pain, particularly chronic pain, is still an area of medical need. In this context, opioids remain a gold standard for the treatment of pain. However, significant side effects, mainly of central origin, limit their clinical use. Here, we review recent progress to improve the therapeutic and safety profiles of opioids for pain management. Characterization of peripheral opioid-mediated pain mechanisms have been a key component of this process. Several studies identified peripheral µ, δ, and κ opioid receptors (MOR, DOR, and KOR, respectively) and nociceptin/orphanin FQ (NOP) receptors as significant players of opioid-mediated antinociception, able to achieve clinically significant effects independently of any central action. Following this, particularly from a medicinal chemistry point of view, main efforts have been directed towards the peripheralization of opioid receptor agonists with the objective of optimizing receptor activity and minimizing central exposure and the associated undesired effects. These activities have allowed the characterization of a great variety of compounds and investigational drugs that show low central nervous system (CNS) penetration (and therefore a reduced side effect profile) yet maintaining the desired opioid-related peripheral antinociceptive activity. These include highly hydrophilic/amphiphilic and massive molecules unable to easily cross lipid membranes, substrates of glycoprotein P (a extrusion pump that avoids CNS penetration), nanocarriers that release the analgesic agent at the site of inflammation and pain, and pH-sensitive opioid agonists that selectively activate at those sites (and represent a new pharmacodynamic paradigm). Hopefully, patients with pain will benefit soon from the incorporation of these new entities.

Blood-brain barrier: mechanisms governing permeability and interaction with peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) describes the unique properties of endothelial cells (ECs) that line the central nervous system (CNS) microvasculature. The BBB supports CNS homeostasis via EC-associated transport of ions, nutrients, proteins and waste products between the brain and blood. These transport mechanisms also serve as physiological barriers to pathogens, toxins and xenobiotics to prevent them from contacting neural tissue. The mechanisms that govern BBB permeability pose a challenge to drug design for CNS disorders, including pain, but can be exploited to limit the effects of a drug to the periphery, as in the design of the peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) used to treat opioid-induced constipation. Here, we describe BBB physiology, drug properties that affect BBB penetrance and how data from randomized clinical trials of PAMORAs improve our understanding of BBB permeability.

Preventive effects of naldemedine, peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, on morphine-induced nausea and vomiting in ferrets

AIMS

Naldemedine is a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). We investigated the preventive effect of naldemedine on morphine-induced nausea and vomiting in ferrets and conducted a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis.

MAIN METHODS

The antiemetic effect of naldemedine was evaluated as the frequency and time of retching (rhythmic abdominal contractile motion) and vomiting (throwing up vomit or similar reactions) caused by morphine in ferrets. After a single oral administration of naldemedine to ferrets, the plasma concentrations of naldemedine and morphine were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.

KEY FINDINGS

Naldemedine showed a potent and dose-dependent anti-emetic effects against morphine-induced emetic responses, for up to 6 h. The dose of naldemedine that produced half the maximal effect (ED₅₀) value for anti-emetic effect of naldemedine in the morphine-treated ferrets was 0.033 mg/kg. The PK/PD analysis revealed that the antiemetic effect was related to the plasma naldemedine concentration, with a half maximal effective concentration that produces half the maximal effect (EC₅₀) of 3.51 ng/mL. The plasma concentration producing an antiemetic effect was almost 200-fold lower than that inducing an anti-analgesic effect in rats.

SIGNIFICANCE

Naldemedine showed potent inhibition of morphine-induced vomiting for up to 6 h after dosing. These data suggest that naldemedine possesses antiemetic properties and could be effective against opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV).

Naldemedine: A New Option for OIBD

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) is a common complication in long-term opioid users and abusers. It is a burdensome condition, which significantly limits quality of life and is associated with increasing health costs. OIBD affects up to 60% of patients with chronic non-cancer pain and over 80% of patients suffering from cancer pain and is one of the conditions of the most common symptoms associated with opioid maintenance. Given the continued use of opioids for chronic pain management in appropriate patients, OIBD is likely to persist in clinical practice in the coming years. We will herein review its underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the available treatments. In the last years, pharmaceutical research has focused on the opportunity of targeting peripheral mu-opioid receptors without affecting their analgesic activity in the central nervous system, and several peripherally acting mu-opioid receptors antagonists (PAMORAs) drugs have been approved. We will mainly focus on naldemedine, discussing its pharmacological properties, its clinical efficacy and side effects. Head-to-head comparisons between naldemedine and the other PAMORAs are not available yet, but some considerations will be discussed based on the pharmacological and clinical data. As a whole, the available data suggest that naldemedine is a valid treatment option for OIBD, as it is a well-tolerated drug that alleviates constipation without affecting analgesia or causing symptoms of opioid withdrawal.

Clinical Drug-Drug Interaction Studies to Evaluate the Effects of a P-Glycoprotein Inhibitor, CYP3A Inhibitors, and a CYP3A Inducer on the Pharmacokinetics of Naldemedine in Healthy Subjects

Background

Naldemedine is a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist that is indicated to treat opioid-induced constipation.

Objectives

To assess the potential for drug-drug interactions between a single oral dose of naldemedine and the oral P-glycoprotein inhibitor cyclosporine, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A inhibitors itraconazole and fluconazole, and CYP3A inducer rifampin.

Methods

Three Phase 1, open-label studies were conducted in healthy subjects. In the P-glycoprotein inhibitor study, subjects received naldemedine 0.4 mg alone or coadministered with cyclosporine 600 mg. In the CYP3A inhibitors study, subjects in separate cohorts received naldemedine 0.2 mg alone or with itraconazole or fluconazole. In the CYP3A inducer study, subjects received naldemedine 0.2 mg alone or with rifampin 600 mg. Geometric mean ratios and 90 % confidence intervals were used to evaluate the effects of coadministered drugs on naldemedine maximum plasma concentration (C_max) and the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC). Safety assessments included occurrence of adverse events (AEs), laboratory parameters, vital signs, and electrocardiography results.

Results

A total of 56 subjects were enrolled (n = 14 in each cohort). Cyclosporine increased naldemedine AUC_0–inf 1.78-fold and C_max 1.45-fold. Itraconazole and fluconazole increased naldemedine AUC_0–inf 2.91-fold and 1.90-fold, and C_max 1.12-fold and 1.38-fold, respectively. Rifampin decreased naldemedine AUC_0–inf by 83% and C_max by 38%. Across studies, AEs were generally mild. Laboratory, vital sign, or electrocardiogram assessments produced no clinically significant findings.

Conclusions

Coadministration of naldemedine with a P-glycoprotein inhibitor or a strong/moderate CYP3A inhibitor increases naldemedine exposure; coadministration with a strong CYP3A inducer decreases its exposure. Coadministration of naldemedine with cyclosporine, itraconazole, fluconazole, or rifampin was generally safe and well tolerated.

Naldemedine is a targeted medication approved in the USA, Europe, and Japan for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. Symptoms of constipation may include passing fewer stools than usual, having lumpy or hard stools, and/or straining to have bowel movements. In some cases, these symptoms are side effects of regular opioid use, which is often medically necessary for the management of moderate-to-severe pain. For naldemedine to be prescribed safely, doctors must know what other medications a patient is taking and how these medications may affect one another. This is commonly known as drug-drug interactions. Some drug-drug interactions may decrease how well a medication works, while other drug-drug interactions may increase the side effects experienced by a patient. In this paper, researchers report the results of three Phase 1 studies in healthy subjects examining how naldemedine interacts with other drugs. The drugs chosen for investigation are commonly evaluated in DDI studies and may affect the transport or metabolic pathway of naldemedine, including the P-glycoprotein inhibitor cyclosporine, the CYP3A inhibitors itraconazole and fluconazole, and the CYP3A inducer rifampin. These studies demonstrate that co-administration of naldemedine with each of these drugs impacted the pharmacokinetics of naldemedine. Cyclosporine, itraconazole, or fluconazole all increased naldemedine exposure, while rifampin decreased naldemedine exposure. For all drug combinations, observed side effects were generally mild and well tolerated. Additional testing, including vital signs and heart monitoring, did not reveal any other safety concerns. In conclusion, these findings support the cautious use of naldemedine in combination with cyclosporine, itraconazole or fluconazole. Concomitant use with rifampin should be avoided.

Opioid-Induced Constipation in Oncological Patients: New Strategies of Management

OPINION STATEMENT

Cancer-associated pain has traditionally been treated with opioid analgesics, often in escalating doses. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a common problem associated with chronic use of opioid analgesics. Typical treatment strategies to alleviate constipation are based on dietary changes, exercise, and laxatives. However, laxatives have a nonspecific action and do not target underlying mechanisms of OIC. This article will review prevalent, clinical presentation and recommendations for the treatment of OIC. An independent literature search was carried out by the authors. We reviewed the literature for randomized controlled trials that studied the efficacy of laxatives, naloxone, and naloxegol in treating OIC. Newer strategies addressing the causal pathophysiology of OIC are needed for a more effective assessment and management of OIC. Finally, traditional recommended therapies are appraised and compared with the latest pharmacological developments. Future research should address whether naloxegol is more efficacious by its comparison directly with first-line treatments, including laxatives.

The Influence of Renal or Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Naldemedine

Naldemedine is a peripherally acting μ‐opioid‐receptor antagonist for the treatment of opioid‐induced constipation. Two phase 1 single‐dose studies investigated the pharmacokinetics and safety of a 0.2‐mg oral dose of naldemedine in subjects with renal impairment (mild, n = 9; moderate, n = 9; severe, n = 6; and end‐stage renal disease, n = 8) or hepatic impairment (mild or moderate, n = 8 each) and demographically matched healthy subjects with normal renal and hepatic function (n = 8, both studies). Pharmacokinetic assessments indicate that dose adjustments for naldemedine are not necessary for subjects with any degree of renal impairment or for subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. In subjects with renal impairment compared with healthy subjects with normal renal function, the geometric mean ratios of naldemedine area under the concentration‐time curve (AUC_0‐inf) ranged from 82.8% (90%CI 69.5% to 98.6%) to 137.8% (90%CI 114.0% to 166.5%). Renal clearance decreased with reduced renal function (normal function 1.3 L/h; mild impairment 1.1 L/h; moderate impairment 1.0 L/h; severe impairment 0.5 L/h), and only 2.7% of naldemedine was removed by hemodialysis. In subjects with hepatic impairment compared with healthy subjects with normal hepatic function, the geometric mean ratio of AUC_0‐inf ranged from 82.8% (90%CI 65.7% to 104.5%) to 105.2% (90%CI 83.4% to 132.6%). Naldemedine was well tolerated in both healthy subjects and subjects with renal or hepatic impairment, and reported adverse events were generally consistent with the known safety profile.