The Management of Opioid-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Pharmacological treatment of cancer pain and opioid induced nausea and vomiting: online survey and comparison with current guidelines

PURPOSE

We assumed that in Palliative Care, even in common clinical situations, the choice of drugs differs substantially between physicians. Therefore, we assessed the practice of pharmaceutical treatment choices of physicians for cancer pain and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the rationale for their choices.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted with physicians covering the following domains: i) Cancer pain therapy: non-opioids in addition to opioids: choice of drug ii) prevention of OINV: choice of drug and mode of application. Current guidelines concerning cancer pain therapy and prevention of OINV were compared.

RESULTS

Two-hundred-forty European physicians responded to our survey. i) Use of non-opioids in addition to opioids for the treatment of cancer pain: Only 1.3% (n = 3) of respondents never used an additional non-opioid. Others mostly used: dipyrone/metamizole (49.2%, n = 118), paracetamol/acetaminophen (34.2%, n = 82), ibuprofen / other NSAIDs (11.3%, n = 27), specific Cox2-inhibitors (2.1%, n = 5), Aspirin (0.4%, n = 1), no answer (2.9%, n = 7). ii) Antiemetics to prevent OINV: The drugs of choice were metoclopramide (58.3%, n = 140), haloperidol (26.3%, n = 63), 5-HT3 antagonists (9.6%, n = 23), antihistamines (1.3%, n = 3) and other (2.9%, n = 7); no answer (1.7%, n = 4). Most respondents prescribed the substances on-demand (59.6%, n = 143) while others (36.3%, n = 87) provided them as around the clock medication. Over both domains, most physicians answered that their choices were not based on solid evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Guidelines were inconsistent regarding if and what non-opioid to use for cancer pain and recommend anti-dopaminergic drugs for prevention or treatment of OINV.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician's practice in palliative care for the treatment of cancer pain and OINV differed substantially. Respondents expressed the lack of high-quality evidence- based information from RCTs. We call for evidence from methodologically high-quality RCTs to be available to inform physicians about the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments for common symptoms in palliative care.

Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review

Pain is one of the most burdensome symptoms in people with cancer, and opioid analgesics are considered the mainstay of cancer pain management. For this review, the authors evaluated the efficacy and toxicities of opioid analgesics compared with placebo, other opioids, nonopioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic treatments for background cancer pain (continuous and relatively constant pain present at rest), and breakthrough cancer pain (transient exacerbation of pain despite stable and adequately controlled background pain). They found a paucity of placebo-controlled trials for background cancer pain, although tapentadol or codeine may be more efficacious than placebo (moderate-certainty to low-certainty evidence). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including aspirin, piroxicam, diclofenac, ketorolac, and the antidepressant medicine imipramine, may be at least as efficacious as opioids for moderate-to-severe background cancer pain. For breakthrough cancer pain, oral transmucosal, buccal, sublingual, or intranasal fentanyl preparations were identified as more efficacious than placebo but were more commonly associated with toxicities, including constipation and nausea. Despite being recommended worldwide for the treatment of cancer pain, morphine was generally not superior to other opioids, nor did it have a more favorable toxicity profile. The interpretation of study results, however, was complicated by the heterogeneity in the study populations evaluated. Given the limited quality and quantity of research, there is a need to reappraise the clinical utility of opioids in people with cancer pain, particularly those who are not at the end of life, and to further explore the effects of opioids on immune system function and quality of life in these individuals.

Slower intravenous tramadol administration can prevent nausea and vomiting and predict postoperative nausea and vomiting: a randomized controlled trial

Objective

Nausea and vomiting are the most common complications in patients who use tramadol for analgesia. This study evaluated the risk of nausea and vomiting related to intravenous tramadol administration.

Methods

In this study, 315 patients who received pre-analgesia before elective surgery were selected, and participants were divided into groups based on the Apfel risk assessment of nausea and vomiting, as follows: high risk (Apfel=4), medium risk (Apfel=2-3), and low-risk (Apfel=1). Tramadol (1.5 mg/kg) was administered intravenously over a duration of 1 min, 2 min, or 3 min before anaesthesia induction to observe preoperative nausea and vomiting reactions within 10 min.

Results

In the low-risk group, the numeric rating scale for postoperative nausea scores and the incidence of nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the 3-min group than those in the 1-min group, and the incidence of preoperative nausea and vomiting after intravenous administration of tramadol in the 1-min and 3-min groups were significantly related to the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The incidence of nausea and vomiting during pre-administration in the 1-min and 3-min groups was identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Conclusions

In the clinical treatment of pain with tramadol, the slow intravenous application of tramadol within 3 min is worthy of being adopted and promoted by clinicians in their daily work.

A structured laughter yoga therapy program on patients with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A randomized clinical trial

Objetive

Chemotherapy is a prevalent cancer treatment, often accompanied by debilitating side effects such as nausea and vomiting. This study explores the potential effectiveness of laughter yoga, a combination of exercise and voluntary laughter, in alleviating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Methods

This two-group randomized clinical trial was conducted on 69 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy at the Reza Chemotherapy and Oncology Center, Mashhad, Iran, in 2018. Patients were randomly divided into intervention and control groups. Both groups received routine self-care training, with the addition of four 20-min to 30-min laughter yoga sessions held immediately before one of their chemotherapy appointments for the intervention group only. Nausea and vomiting were assessed using the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis questionnaire at two stages, before and after the intervention. Data were analyzed with Chi-square, Independent-t, Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).

Results

The mean age of patients in the intervention group was 49.0 ± 9.6 years, while in the control group, it was 45.2 ± 12.6 years. The intragroup comparison showed a statistically significant decrease in the severity and duration of nausea in the intervention group and a statistically significant increase in the severity and duration of nausea in the control group from pre-test to post-test (P < 0.05). The intergroup comparison showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of vomiting conditions.

Conclusions

Laughter yoga demonstrates promise in improving chemotherapy-induced nausea, suggesting its potential recommendation for managing this distressing side effect. Further research is warranted to explore its broader application in cancer care.

Trial registration

This study (No. IRCT20180429039463N1) was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials on 21/08/2018.

Effect of anesthesia induction with butorphanol on postoperative nausea and vomiting: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications that affect the recovery and well-being of elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal laparoscopic surgery.

AIM

To investigate the effect of butorphanol on PONV in this patient population.

METHODS

A total of 110 elderly patients (≥ 65 years old) who underwent gastrointestinal laparoscopic surgery were randomly assigned to receive butorphanol (40 μg/kg) or sufentanil (0.3 μg/kg) during anesthesia induction in a 1:1 ratio. The measured outcomes included the incidence of PONV at 48 h after surgery, intraoperative dose of propofol and remifentanil, Bruggrmann Comfort Scale score in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), number of compressions for postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), and time to first flatulence after surgery.

RESULTS

The results revealed a noteworthy reduction in the occurrence of PONV at 24 h after surgery in the butorphanol group, when compared to the sufentanil group (T1: 23.64% vs 5.45%, T2: 43.64% vs 20.00%, P < 0.05). However, no significant variations were observed between the two groups, in terms of the clinical characteristics, such as the PONV or motion sickness history, intraoperative and postoperative 48-h total infusion volume and hemodynamic parameters, intraoperative dose of propofol and remifentanil, number of postoperative PCIA compressions, time until the first occurrence of postoperative flatulence, and incidence of PONV at 48 h post-surgery (all, P > 0.05). Furthermore, patients in the butorphanol group were more comfortable, when compared to patients in the sufentanil group in the PACU.

CONCLUSION

The present study revealed that butorphanol can be an efficacious substitute for sufentanil during anesthesia induction to diminish PONV within 24 h following gastrointestinal laparoscopic surgery in the elderly, simultaneously improving patient comfort in the PACU.

Nomogram for predicting opioid-induced nausea and vomiting for cancer pain patients

OBJECTIVE

Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting are frequently observed as an adverse effect in the treatment of cancer-related pain. The factors that affect OINV in cancer patients remain unclear. In this study, we developed a nomogram for predicting the occurrence of OINV in this population using retrospective clinical data.

METHODS

We collected data from 416 cancer pain patients, 70% of whom used the training set to analyze demographic and clinical variables. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify significant factors associated with OINV. Then, we construct a prediction nomogram. The validation set comprises the remaining 30%. The reliability of the nomogram is evaluated by bootstrap resampling.

RESULTS

Using multivariate logistic regression, we identified five significant factors associated with OINV. The C-index was 0.835 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.828-0.842) for the training set and 0.810 (95% CI, 0.793-0.826) for the validation set. The calibrated curves show a good agreement between the predicted and actual occurrence of OINV.

CONCLUSION

In a retrospective study based on five saliency-found variables, we developed and proved a reliable nomogram model to predict OINV in cancer pain patients. Future prospective studies should assess the model's reliability and usefulness in clinical practice.

Prevalence of opioid-induced adverse events across opioids commonly used for analgesic treatment in Japan: a multicenter prospective longitudinal study

PURPOSE

Although opioids have been shown to be effective for cancer pain, opioid-induced adverse events (AEs) are common. To date, little is known about the differences in risks of AEs by opioid type. This study was performed to compare the prevalence of AEs across opioids commonly used for analgesic treatment in Japan.

METHODS

This study was conducted as a preplanned secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective longitudinal study of inpatients with cancer pain who received specialized palliative care for cancer pain relief. We assessed daily AEs until termination of follow-up. We rated the severity of AEs based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. We computed adjusted odds ratios for each AE (constipation, nausea and vomiting, delirium, and drowsiness) with the following variables: opioid, age, sex, renal dysfunction, and primary cancer site.

RESULTS

In total, 465 patients were analyzed. Based on the descriptive analysis, the top four most commonly used opioids were included in the analysis: oxycodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, and tramadol. With respect to the prevalence of AEs among all analyzed patients, delirium (n = 25, 6.3%) was the most frequent, followed by drowsiness (n = 21, 5.3%), nausea and vomiting (n = 19, 4.8%), and constipation (n = 28, 4.6%). The multivariate logistic analysis showed that no single opioid was identified as a statistically significant independent predictor of any AE.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the prevalence of AEs among oxycodone, fentanyl, hydromorphone, and tramadol, which are commonly used for analgesic treatment in Japan.

Quadratus lumborum block and transversus abdominis plane block in laparoscopic nephrectomy: a meta-analysis

Aim: To study the efficacy of quadratus lumborum block (QLB) and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) in laparoscopic nephrectomy patients. Materials & methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for QLB and/or TAP technique compared with each other or a control. Results: Direct analysis of 24 h post-op pain score at rest for each compared with control showed significant reduction, QLB (mean differences [MD] [95% CI]: -1.12 [-1.87,-0.36]; p = 0.004) and TAP (MD [95% CI]: -0.36 [-0.59, -0.12]; p = 0.003). With movement both were respectively lower than control QLB (MD [95% CI]: -1.12 [-1.51, -0.72]; p = <0.0001) and TAP (MD [95% CI]: -0.50 [-0.95, -0.05]; p = 0.03). Moreover, QLB demonstrated less risk 24 h of post-op nausea vomiting (PONV) versus control (PONV; risk ratios [RR] [95% CI]: 0.64 [0.45,0.90]; p = 0.01). Conclusion: TAP and QLB reduce pain scores compared with control, whereas only QLB reduces PONV compared with control.

The Stigma Surrounding Opioid Use as a Barrier to Cancer-Pain Management: An Overview of Experiences with Fear, Shame, and Poorly Controlled Pain in the Context of Advanced Cancer

Cancer-related pain affects a majority of patients with advanced cancer and is often undertreated. The treatment of this pain is largely reliant on the use of opioids, which are essential medicines for symptom management and the maintenance of quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer. While there are cancer-specific guidelines for the treatment of pain, widespread publication and policy changes in response to the opioid epidemic have drastically impacted perceptions of opioid use. This overview therefore aims to investigate how manifestations of opioid stigma impact pain management in cancer settings, with an emphasis on the experiences of patients with advanced cancer. Opioid use has been widely stigmatized in multiple domains, including public, healthcare, and patient populations. Physician hesitancy in prescribing and pharmacist vigilance in dispensing were identified as barriers to optimal pain management, and may contribute to stigma in the context of advanced cancer. Evidence in the literature suggests that opioid stigma may result in patient deviations from prescription instructions, which generally leads to pain undertreatment. Patients reflected on experiencing shame and fear surrounding their prescription opioid use and feeling uncomfortable communicating with their healthcare providers on these topics. Our findings indicate that future work is required to educate patients and providers in order to de-stigmatize opioid use. Through alleviating stigma, patients may be better able to make decisions regarding their pain management which lead to freedom from cancer-related pain and improved QoL.

Assessment and management of nausea and vomiting in cancer survivors

ABSTRACT

Nausea and vomiting may occur in cancer survivors during or independent of treatment. A complete assessment is necessary to determine the etiology and to plan specific and successful interventions. NPs have a key role in managing cancer survivors' symptoms and determining the best supportive care.

An update on the use of pharmacotherapy for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

With the growing rate of aging and the incidence of chronic diseases, there has been an upsurge in opioid prescription and abuse worldwide. This has been associated with increased reports of opioid-related adverse events, particularly opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD), calling for a rational clinical management strategy.

AREAS COVERED

Through searching PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, English literature was gathered as of 1 January 2017. Furthermore, the USFDA, EMA, TGA, Clinicaltrials.Gov, WHO-ICTRP databases, and the latest guidelines were reviewed to extract ongoing clinical studies and provide an evidence-based expert opinion with detailed information on efficacy, safety, approval status, and pharmacokinetics of the currently used medications.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the significant burden of OIBD, the clinical development of agents lags behind disease progress. Although in most places, management of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is initiated by lifestyle modifications followed by laxatives, opioid antagonists, and secretagogue agents, there are still major conflicts among global guidelines. The fundamental reason is the lack of head-to-head clinical trials providing inter- and intragroup comparisons between PAMORAs, laxatives, and secretagogue agents. These investigations must be accompanied by further valid biopharmaceutical and economic evaluations, paving the way for rational clinical judgment in each context.

Use of Opioids for Adults With Pain From Cancer or Cancer Treatment: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance on the use of opioids to manage pain from cancer or cancer treatment in adults.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in people with cancer, approaches to opioid initiation and titration, and the prevention and management of opioid adverse events. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2010, to February 17, 2022. American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 31 systematic reviews and 16 randomized controlled trials. Opioids have primarily been evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, and they effectively reduce pain in this population, with well-characterized adverse effects. Evidence was limited for several of the questions of interest, and the Expert Panel relied on consensus for these recommendations or noted that no recommendation could be made at this time.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Opioids should be initiated PRN (as needed) at the lowest possible dose to achieve acceptable analgesia and patient goals, with early assessment and frequent titration. For patients with a substance use disorder, clinicians should collaborate with a palliative care, pain, and/or substance use disorder specialist to determine the optimal approach to pain management. Opioid adverse effects should be monitored, and strategies are provided for prevention and management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Fluoroscopic anterior approach versus ultrasound guided superior hypogastric plexus neurolysis in cancer pelvic pain: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pelvic pain can be difficult and debilitating to treat. Superior hypogastric plexus neurolysis (SHPN) is a good choice for adequate pain relief with fewer side effects. The current study compared between fluoroscopic anterior approach and ultrasound guided SHPN in the management of cancer-related pelvic pain.

METHODS

Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups. The ultrasound group (US group) (n = 48) received SHPN by an ultrasound-guided anterior approach using 3 ml 5% bupivacaine plus 20 ml 10% phenol, while the fluoroscopy group (n = 48) received SHPN by a fluoroscopy-guided anterior approach using 3 ml 5% bupivacaine plus 20 ml 10% phenol.

RESULTS

The time of the procedure was shorter in the fluoroscopic group (21.31 ± 4.79 min) than the US group (24.88 ± 6.02 min) (P = 0.002). Patient satisfaction was higher in the fluoroscopy group (5.38 ± 1.482) than the US group (2.98 ± 1.495) (P˂0.001). The need for analgesia using morphine was significantly limited in each group, at 1, 2 and 3 months intervals (P₁˂0.001, P₂ ˂0.001 and P₃ ˂0.001). There were statistically significant differences between both groups regarding fatigue at baseline, drowsiness at 3 months, nausea and vomiting at 1, 2 and 3 months and anorexia at 3 months. Group comparison also revealed statistically significant differences regarding depression at one month, anxiety at 2 and 3 months and insomnia at baseline.

CONCLUSION

The fluoroscopic anterior approach SHPN was more superior than the US guided SHPN regarding the time of the procedure and patient satisfaction, while both technique were similar regarding the numeric rating scale and the complications during block.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT05299047) at 28/03/2022.

Assistance of a Palliative Care Certified Nurse in the Alleviation of Refractory Cancer Pain by Switching Opioids to Oral Methadone in a Japanese Outpatient Setting

Although methadone has the potential to improve the management of cancer pain, it has some serious problems, such as respiratory depression and QT interval prolongation. Therefore, patients who are prescribed methadone must be educated, monitored, and supported by specialized medical staff, especially in the outpatient setting. We assessed the effectiveness of support from the palliative care certified nurse who used the checklists in opioid switching to oral methadone for patients with refractory pain. Through the multidisciplinary palliative care team at our hospital, 15 outpatients with cancer pain were prescribed oral methadone between April 2013 and December 2020, and 14 cases were successful in switching to methadone. After taking medication, the certified nurse called the patient's home daily for 3 to 5 days and confirmed that the patient had taken the methadone, the degree of pain, the number of rescue medications, and the appearance of side effects, such as respiratory depression. Careful management by a multidisciplinary team is essential for opioid switching to oral methadone administration for outpatients. Certified nurses may play an important role in maintaining safety and resolving the patients' and families' anxieties with respect to the prescription of methadone.

Effectiveness of collaboration between oncology pharmacists and anaesthesiologists for inpatient cancer pain management: A pilot study in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of the collaboration between oncology pharmacists and anaesthesiologists for improving pain control management in cancer patients.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control pilot study enrolled inpatients with active cancer and a pain score of >3 at least once per day for 3 consecutive days. The study group was selected from June 2018 to January 2019. Patients with the same inclusion criteria were selected between November 2017 and May 2018 to serve as the comparison group. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients that experienced pain relief within 7 days from initial pain attack.

RESULTS

A total of 71 and 77 patients were enrolled in the study and comparison groups. More patients in the study group experienced pain relief within 7 days from the index date (78.9% [56 of 71 patients] versus 72.7% [56 of 77 patients], respectively). The service increased the rate of intervention from attending physicians within 4 days from index date and quality of opioid management.

CONCLUSION

The collaboration between oncology pharmacists and anaesthesiologists for cancer pain management may be associated with an increase in the rate of pain relief in cancer patients with poor pain control.

Opioid-Related Side Effects and Management

The following areas will be discussed in relation to opioid-related side effects and approaches to their management in the cancer patient.

MASCC antiemetics in advanced cancer updated guideline

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are a common clinical symptom in the advanced cancer patient. Pharmacologic management is important. Evidence for drug choices and guidelines are needed to help clinicians manage nausea and vomiting in this population METHODS: Evidence from a systematic review published in 2010, initial MASCC guidelines developed from a systematic review of literature to 2015, and a new systematic review of randomized trials published between 2015 and February 2, 2021, was combined to establish a new guideline.

RESULTS

A search of the literature between 2015 and February 2, 2021, revealed 257 abstracts of which there was one systematic review and 4 randomized trials which were used to modify the guideline. The new guideline is as follows: First Line: Metoclopramide (II) multiple small RCTs including a placebo-controlled trial, haloperidol (II) multiple non-placebo-controlled RCTs, high consensus. Second line: Methotrimeprazine (II) 1 well-powered non-placebo-controlled RCT, olanzapine (II) 1 placebo-controlled pilot RCT, high consensus. Third line: Tropisetron (II) large unblinded lower quality non-placebo-controlled RCT, levosulpiride (II) 1 blinded non-placebo-controlled pilot RCT, high consensus.

DISCUSSION

Haloperidol, metoclopramide, methotrimeprazine, olanzapine tropisetron, and levosulpiride have been antiemetics used in randomized trials with antiemetic activity demonstrated. There are only three placebo-controlled randomized trials we could find in our literature review. Placebo responses varied significantly between two randomized trials. More randomized placebo-controlled trials with either metoclopramide or haloperidol rescue are needed to clarify antiemetic choices in advanced cancer.

CONCLUSION

First-line antiemetics for nausea and vomiting in advanced cancer are metoclopramide and haloperidol, and second-line medications are methotrimeprazine and olanzapine.

Care of the adult cancer patient at the end of life: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines

•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for end-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer. •It details care that is focused on comfort, quality of life and approaching death of patients with advanced cancer. •All recommendations were compiled by a multidisciplinary group of experts. •Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors’ collective expert opinion.

Effect of Prophylactic Anti-emetics on Opioid-induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The guidelines on pharmacotherapy for cancer-related pain advocate active measures against the adverse effects of opioids to increase adherence to medication. However, preventative therapy for the management of nausea and vomiting has not been specified. This study aimed to verify the effects of prophylactic anti-emetics in preventing opioid-induced nausea and vomiting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of cases at our hospital in which oral opioids or patches were initiated for the management of pain due to malignant tumours from January 2017 to September 2019.

RESULTS

Strong opioids were initiated for 349 patients; of these, data for 298 patients were analysed. A total of 193 patients were on anti-emetic prophylaxis. We found that the group that did not receive anti-emetic prophylaxis was significantly more likely to be prescribed an additional anti-emetic.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic administration of anti-emetics at the time of initiating opioid analgesics may reduce gastrointestinal toxicity.

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).

Effective management of acute postoperative pain using intravenous emulsions of novel ketorolac prodrugs: in vitro and in vivo evaluations

The aim was to prepare intravenous fat emulsions (IFEs) of ketorolac (KTL) ester prodrugs and to investigate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of these formulations. Three prodrugs of KTL (KTL-IS, KTL-AX and KTL-BT) were synthesized as a means to increase the lipid solubility of KTL. All KTL prodrugs with higher Log P values presented increased tendency to partition into a blank IFE using extemporaneous addition method - the encapsulation efficiency of KTL-IS IFE and KTL-BT IFE was more than 97%. The particle sizes and zeta potentials of these two formulations were comparable to that of the blank IFE. PK studies in rabbits showed significant larger AUC0-8h (646.969 ± 154.326 mg/L•h-1 for KTL-IS IFE and 559.426 ± 103.057 mg/L•h-1 for KTL-BT IFE) than that of ketorolac tromethamine (KTL-T) injectable (286.968 ± 63.045 mg/L•h-1) and approximately 2-fold increases in the elimination t1/2 over KTL-T. In a rat postoperative pain model, the paw withdrawal thresholds and the paw withdrawal latency after I.V. KTL prodrug IFEs were significantly higher than that after I.V. KTL-T at 3~4 h. Effective controlling of acute postoperative pain in a longer duration can be achieved by using non-addictive ketorolac derivatives intraveneous emulsions.

Antiemetic drugs: what to prescribe and when

Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms with many possible causes, including the adverse effects of drugs. If a drug is indicated, the cause guides the choice of antiemetic drug The main antiemetic classes include antagonists of the serotonin, dopamine, histamine, muscarinic and neurokinin systems, corticosteroids and benzodiazepines. Some antiemetics appear more effective for specific indications Serotonin and neurokinin antagonists, such as ondansetron and aprepitant, are highly effective in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Metoclopramide and antihistamines are first-line options for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy Serotonin antagonists and some dopamine antagonists, such as metoclopramide, can prolong the QT interval on the ECG. Dopamine antagonists can cause extrapyramidal adverse effects, particularly in children

The Palliative Care of Patients With Incurable Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of palliative medicine is to optimize the quality of life of patients with incurable, progressive diseases. The care delivered in actual clinical practice is not uniform and often takes insufficient account of the currently available scientific evidence.

METHODS

In accordance with the methodological directives on systematic literature reviews and consensus-finding that have been issued by the German Oncology Guideline Program (Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie), a nationwide, representative group of experts updated the previously published seven chapters of the S3 (evidence-based and consensus-based) guideline and formulated new recommen- dations on a further eight topics in palliative care.

RESULTS

Non-drug options for the treatment of fatigue include aerobic exercise and psycho-educative methods, particularly cognitive behavioral therapy. Sleep distur- bances can be treated with improved sleep hygiene and relaxation techniques, as well as with drugs: Z substances for short-term and sedating antidepressants for intermediate-term treatment. For nausea and vomiting, the first line of treatment consists of antidopaminergic drugs, such as haloperidol, or drugs with an antido- paminergic effect combined with a further receptor affinity, such as metoclopramide. For patients suffering from malignant intestinal obstruction (MIO), an important con- sideration for further treatment is whether the obstruction is complete or incomplete. Psychotherapeutic interventions are indicated for the treatment of anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Multiple studies have confirmed the benefit of the early integration of palliative care for achieving the goals of better symptom control and maintenance of derate quality of evidence supporting the management of certain symptoms in patients with incurable cancers.

Nausea and Vomiting: a Palliative Care Imperative

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review was undertaken to survey recent literature for research reports and comprehensive clinical reviews addressing the pharmacologic management of nausea and vomiting (N&V) in advanced cancer. The goal was to integrate findings in a comprehensive article that incorporates palliative care concepts into antiemetic treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are few published studies of N&V in advanced cancer; such research may be limited by the multicausal nature of N&V and participant burden to patients with life-limiting disease. Most articles are written by oncologists who also specialize in palliative care, and those addressing adverse effects of drugs used as antiemetics are found in other literature. Articles addressing more novel therapies, like cannabinoids and medical marijuana, are uncommon in the oncology literature. N&V in patients with progressive or advanced cancer is often multicausal. Nausea is more common and persistent, and even mild nausea is bothersome and may cause anxiety or depression. The mechanisms of nausea and vomiting overlap, but different neural pathways constitute the final pathway for each-the brainstem for vomiting and higher brain regions for nausea. Common causes of N&V in advanced cancer include constipation, opioids, and malignant bowel obstruction. About 40% have undetermined causes and may be exacerbated by impaired gastric emptying, chemical imbalances, or other factors. Several drugs that have antiemetic effects and act at different receptors are used to palliate N&V. There is a paucity of research that supports palliative antiemetic choices, and other research is needed to define potential therapeutic strategies that capitalize on differences between nausea and vomiting.

Prophylactic use of antiemetics for prevention of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting: a survey about Italian physicians' practice

PURPOSE

Antiemetics are being used both for the treatment and prophylaxis of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) in clinical practice, despite the lack of evidence for the prophylactic benefit. Studies among Japanese physicians demonstrated over 80% prescribe antiemetics, with neuroleptic antipsychotics as the most commonly prescribed drugs. Our objective was to elucidate the current scenario of the prophylactic use of antiemetics for OINV among Italian physicians.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based cross-sectional national survey. All the invited participants received an e-mail with an 11-item electronic questionnaire accessible through a direct link. Anonymity was guaranteed. According to the exploratory intent of the survey, we did not predefine any formal statistical hypothesis. Associations between variables were tested by the Pearson chi-square or the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

From January to March 2017, 112 completed the electronic questionnaire (112/256, overall response rate, 43.7%). Nearly half of the participants were oncologists (54; 48.2%). Sixty-one (54.4%) physicians worked in palliative care units. About 45% of the interviewed prescribed prophylactic antiemetics at the beginning of opioid prescription. The most commonly chosen drugs for this purpose were prokinetics such as metoclopramide and domperidone (84%), followed by 5-HT3 antagonists (8%), neuroleptic antipsychotics (6%), and corticosteroids (2%). Ninety-one physicians (81%) declared to prescribe antiemetics at the occurrence of OINV, mainly prokinetics (N = 70; 77%).

CONCLUSION

Italian physicians do not commonly prescribe prophylactic antiemetics for OINV. Unlike previously reported data, dopamine antagonists resulted the most commonly prescribed drugs. Prospective clinical trials are necessary to evaluate the real efficacy of this practice.