Retrospective review of patients treated for cyclic vomiting syndrome with topiramate

Cyclic vomiting syndrome: Future clinical and research priorities for: Special supplement/proceedings of 3rd international symposium

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of studies have explored the clinical features, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). CVS is common in adults and children and negatively impacts patients, families, and the healthcare system. A related condition, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS), has been a focus of interest in the lay press and published literature.

PURPOSE

Clinical presentations of CVS have been defined by small series and expert opinion, but recent prospective studies are refining our understanding of the spectrum of emetic episodes and the breadth of comorbid conditions. Large cross-sectional population analyses are clarifying CVS prevalence and factors related to age, ethnicity, and geographic region. CVS pathophysiology is multifactorial with contributions from migraines, dysautonomia, endogenous cannabinoids, mitochondrial dysfunction, genetic abnormalities, and rapid gastric emptying. CVS treatment relies on antiemetics and antimigraine therapies to abort acute episodes coupled with prophylactic regimens employing neuromodulators and antiepileptics. CHS represents a challenge partly because of difficulties in achieving sustained cannabis abstinence. Benefits of other therapies in CHS remain poorly defined. Several areas warrant further scrutiny including better identification of CVS triggers and characterization of different CVS subsets including those with frequent severe episodes, refined description of epidemiology to allow targeting of populations predisposed to CVS development, rigorous definition of pathogenic factors to provide a foundation for exploratory studies of novel therapies, and conduct of controlled trials by multicenter collaborations to confirm benefits of existing and new therapies in development. Progress in these areas will be facilitated by generous governmental and industry support.

Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome and Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome: The State of the Science

This article provides a narrative review of the state of the science for both cyclic vomiting syndrome and cannabis hyperemesis syndrome along with a discussion of the relationship between these 2 conditions. The scope of this review includes the historical context of these conditions as well as the prevalence, diagnostic criteria, pathogenesis, and treatment strategies for both conditions. A synopsis of the endocannabinoid system provides a basis for the hypothesis that a lack of cannabidiol in modern high-potency Δ 9 -tetrahydrocannabinol cannabis may be contributory to cannabis hyperemesis syndrome and possibly other cannabis use disorders. In concluding assessment, though the publications addressing both adult cyclic vomiting syndrome and cannabis hyperemesis syndrome are steadily increasing overall, the state of the science supporting the treatments, prognosis, etiology, and confounding factors (including cannabis use) is of moderate quality. Much of the literature portrays these conditions separately and as such sometimes fails to account for the confounding of adult cyclic vomiting syndrome with cannabis hyperemesis syndrome. The diagnostic and therapeutic approaches are, at present, based generally on case series publications and expert opinion, with a very limited number of randomized controlled trials and a complete absence of Level 1 evidence within the cyclic vomiting literature overall as well as for cannabis hyperemesis syndrome specifically.

Efficacy of aprepitant as a prophylactic medication in adults with cyclic vomiting syndrome

BACKGROUND

Aprepitant is a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and recent guidelines by the American Neurogastoenterology and Motility Society recommend its use as prophylaxis in moderate-to severe cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). Data are limited to small studies in children. We aimed to determine its efficacy in adults with CVS.

METHODS

A retrospective review of CVS patients diagnosed using Rome criteria at a tertiary referral center was conducted. Drug response was defined as >50% reduction in symptoms and/or healthcare utilization. An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis was conducted.

KEY RESULTS

Of 96 patients prescribed aprepitant, 26 (27%) were unable to start due to cost/lack of insurance coverage. Of 70 receiving therapy, mean age was 33 ± 11 years; 51 (73%) were female and 56 (80%) Caucasian. The majority (93%) were refractory to other prophylactic medications. Aprepitant was taken thrice weekly in 51 (73%), daily in 16 (23%) and a few times a month in 3 (4%) due to cost. Fifty (71.4%) had a global symptom response to aprepitant. There was significant reduction in the number of CVS episodes (14.5 ± 11.7 to 6.2 ± 8.0, p < 0.0001), emergency department visits (4.2 ± 7.7 to 1.8 ± 3.4, p = 0.006), and hospital admissions (1.6 ± 3.9 to 0.8 ± 2.1, p = 0.02) in patients treated with aprepitant. Seven (10%) discontinued the drug due to minor side effects.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Aprepitant is a safe and effective prophylactic medication in adults with refractory CVS. Adequate insurance coverage is a major barrier preventing its use.

Clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes in patients with cyclic vomiting syndrome: A 15-year experience at a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a disorder of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) characterized by recurrent episodes of nausea and vomiting. Most children outgrow their CVS symptoms and develop migraine headaches, but there are limited data in adults. We thus sought to determine the natural history of CVS in adults.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients at a specialized tertiary care clinic. Frequency of CVS episodes, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations were recorded at the index visit and at follow-up.

KEY RESULTS

Of 455 CVS patients with complete data, mean age was 33 ± 13 years, 294 (65%) were female, and 392 (86%) were Caucasian. Mean duration of follow-up was 47.4 ± 37.2 months. There was a significant reduction in frequency of CVS episodes/year (18 to 6.8), ED visits (6.1 to 2), and hospitalizations (2.3 to 0.7) (all p-values < 0.001) but only 88 (19%) of patients had complete resolution of episodes at follow-up. On multivariable regression analysis, non-white race [0.33 (0.11-0.98) p = 0.01], comorbidity count [0.77 (0.62-0.95) p = 0.01], cannabis use [0.36 (0.2-0.65) p = 0.0007], and aprepitant use [0.2 (0.08-0.005) p < 0.001] were associated with a reduced odds of complete resolution of CVS episodes. Of note, 19 patients (4%) died.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

While most adults with CVS improved with specialized care, in contrast to children, only a small subset (~1 in 5) had complete resolution of symptoms. Reasons for the effects of race, cannabis use, and comorbidity burden on outcomes in CVS are unclear and warrant further investigation.

Diagnosis and Management of Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome: A Critical Review

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a chronic disorder of gut-brain interaction characterized by recurrent disabling episodes of nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. CVS affects both children and adults with a prevalence of approximately 2% in the United States. CVS is more common in female individuals and affects all races. The pathophysiology of CVS is unknown and a combination of genetic, environmental, autonomic, and neurohormonal factors is believed to play a role. CVS is also closely associated with migraine headaches and likely have a shared pathophysiology. The diagnosis of CVS is based on the Rome criteria, and minimal recommended testing includes an upper endoscopy and imaging studies of the abdomen. CVS is frequently associated with anxiety, depression, and autonomic dysfunction. Patients with CVS commonly use cannabis therapeutically for symptom relief. By contrast, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome is believed to be a subset of CVS with chronic heavy cannabis use leading to hyperemesis. Due to the recalcitrant nature of the illness, patients often visit the emergency department and are hospitalized for acute CVS flares. Guidelines on the management of CVS recommend a biopsychosocial approach. Prophylactic therapy consists of tricyclic antidepressants (amitriptyline), antiepileptics (topiramate), and aprepitant in refractory patients. Abortive therapy consists of triptans, antiemetics (ondansetron), and sedation. Treatment of comorbid conditions is extremely important to improve overall patient outcomes. CVS has a significant negative impact on patients, families, and the healthcare system, and future research to understand its pathophysiology and develop targeted therapies is needed.

Cyclic vomiting syndrome in children

QUESTION

Several children in my office have recurrent vomiting events and they usually end up in the emergency department for intravenous rehydration. One of them has been suffering from those attacks approximately once per month for the past 2 years, leading to a reduction in her quality of life. What is known about cyclic vomiting syndrome and can it be prevented?

ANSWER

Cyclic vomiting syndrome includes severe episodic vomiting lasting for hours or days, separated by symptom-free intervals. This gut-brain interaction is poorly understood and is difficult to diagnose. Children suffer from relentless vomiting, lethargy, abdominal pain, anorexia, and nausea. Half of the children require intravenous rehydration. Once diagnosis is made, supportive measures to reduce suffering are recommended and include administering fluids, encouraging sleep, promoting quiet environments, and administering antiemetics or sedatives. In adults, tricyclic antidepressants such as amitriptyline, as well as topiramate as second-line therapy, have been proposed for prophylactic treatment. However, pediatric data are very limited and evidence does not support any recommended course of prophylactic therapy for children with the condition.