Methylnaltrexone bromide: research update of pharmacokinetics following parenteral administration

No Effect of Methylnaltrexone on Acute Pancreatitis Severity: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Opioids used to manage severe pain in acute pancreatitis (AP) might exacerbate the disease through effects on gastrointestinal and immune functions. Methylnaltrexone, a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, may counteract these effects without changing analgesia.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial included adult patients with AP and systemic inflammatory response syndrome at 4 Danish centers. Patients were randomized to receive 5 days of continuous intravenous methylnaltrexone (0.15 mg/kg/d) or placebo added to the standard of care. The primary end point was the Pancreatitis Activity Scoring System score after 48 hours of treatment. Main secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid use, disease severity, and mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 105 patients (54% men) were randomized to methylnaltrexone (n = 51) or placebo (n = 54). After 48 hours, the Pancreatitis Activity Scoring System score was 134.3 points in the methylnaltrexone group and 130.5 points in the placebo group (difference 3.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] -40.1 to 47.6; P = 0.87). At 48 hours, we found no differences between the groups in pain severity (0.0, 95% CI -0.8 to 0.9; P = 0.94), pain interference (-0.3, 95% CI -1.4 to 0.8; P = 0.55), and morphine equivalent doses (6.5 mg, 95% CI -2.1 to 15.2; P = 0.14). Methylnaltrexone also did not affect the risk of severe disease (8%, 95% CI -11 to 28; P = 0.38) and mortality (6%, 95% CI -1 to 12; P = 0.11). The medication was well tolerated.

DISCUSSION

Methylnaltrexone treatment did not achieve superiority over placebo for reducing the severity of AP.

Insights into the Current and Possible Future Use of Opioid Antagonists in Relation to Opioid-Induced Constipation and Dysbiosis

Opioid receptor agonists, particularly those that activate µ-opioid receptors (MORs), are essential analgesic agents for acute or chronic mild to severe pain treatment. However, their use has raised concerns including, among others, intestinal dysbiosis. In addition, growing data on constipation-evoked intestinal dysbiosis have been reported. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) creates an obstacle to continuing treatment with opioid analgesics. When non-opioid therapies fail to overcome the OIC, opioid antagonists with peripheral, fast first-pass metabolism, and gastrointestinal localized effects remain the drug of choice for OIC, which are discussed here. At first glance, their use seems to only be restricted to constipation, however, recent data on OIC-related dysbiosis and its contribution to the appearance of several opioid side effects has garnered a great of attention from researchers. Peripheral MORs have also been considered as a future target for opioid analgesics with limited central side effects. The properties of MOR antagonists counteracting OIC, and with limited influence on central and possibly peripheral MOR-mediated antinociception, will be highlighted. A new concept is also proposed for developing gut-selective MOR antagonists to treat or restore OIC while keeping peripheral antinociception unaffected. The impact of opioid antagonists on OIC in relation to changes in the gut microbiome is included.

Insights into the Use of Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists (PAMORAs) in Oncologic Patients: from Scientific Evidence to Real Clinical Practice

OPINION STATEMENT

Management of chronic pain is crucial to improve the quality of life of cancer and palliative care patients. Opioid-based treatments used to control pain can be prolonged over time. Unfortunately, constipation is one of the most disturbing adverse effects of long-term use of opioids. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) occurs when opioids bind to the specific receptors present in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, and can affect any patients receiving chronic opioid therapy, including cancer patients. The limited efficacy of laxatives to treat OIC symptoms prompted the search for new therapeutic strategies. Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) have recently emerged as new effective drugs for OIC management due to their specific binding to enteric μ-receptors. Little information is available on the use of PAMORAs in real-life practice for OIC treatment in cancer patients. In this paper, a panel of experts specializing in cancer and palliative care pools their clinical experience with PAMORAs in cancer patients presenting OIC and highlights the importance of timing and choice of therapy in achieving prompt OIC management and benefitting patients.

The MOVEMENT Trial

Background

Morphine administration is a strong predictor of delayed onset of action of orally administered ticagrelor in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, likely because of impaired gastrointestinal motility. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the peripheral opioid antagonist methylnaltrexone could improve pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of orally administered ticagrelor in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction receiving morphine.

Methods and Results

The MOVEMENT (Methylnaltrexone to Improve Platelet Inhibition of Ticagrelor in Morphine‐Treated Patients With ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction treated with morphine and ticagrelor. Upon arrival to the catheterization laboratory, patients were randomized to a blinded intravenous injection of either methylnaltrexone (8 or 12 mg according to weight) or 0.9% sodium chloride. The proportion of patients with high on‐treatment platelet reactivity and plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and AR‐C124910XX were assessed at baseline (arrival in the catheterization laboratory) and 1 and 2 hours later. A total of 82 patients received either methylnaltrexone (n=43) or placebo (n=39). Median (interquartile range) time from ticagrelor administration to randomization was 41 (31–50) versus 45.5 (37–60) minutes (P=0.16). Intravenous methylnaltrexone administration did not significantly affect prevalence of high on‐treatment platelet reactivity at 2 hours after inclusion, the primary end point, when compared with placebo (54% versus 51%, P=0.84). Plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and its active metabolite, the prespecified secondary end points, did not differ significantly between the groups over time. There was no significant difference in patient self‐estimated pain between the groups.

Conclusions

Methylnaltrexone did not significantly improve platelet reactivity or plasma concentrations of orally administered ticagrelor in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction receiving morphine.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02942550.

Effects of Methylnaltrexone on Ticagrelor-Induced Antiplatelet Effects in Coronary Artery Disease Patients Treated With Morphine

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess if intravenous methylnaltrexone can counteract the effects of morphine on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of ticagrelor.

BACKGROUND

Morphine delays the onset of action of oral P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors, including ticagrelor, by inhibiting gastric emptying and leading to delayed drug absorption. Methylnaltrexone is a peripheral opioid receptor antagonist that has the potential to prevent opioid-induced peripherally mediated side effects (e.g., gastric emptying inhibition) without affecting analgesia.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, aspirin-treated patients with stable coronary artery disease (n = 30) were randomized to receive methylnaltrexone (0.3 mg/kg intravenous) or matching placebo. After methylnaltrexone or placebo administration, all patients received morphine (5 mg intravenous). This was followed 15 min later by a 180-mg loading dose of ticagrelor. Patients crossed over to the alternative study treatment after 7 ± 2 days of washout. PK and PD assessments were performed at 12 time points (6 pre- and 6 post-crossover). PK analysis included measurement of plasma levels of ticagrelor and its major active metabolite (AR-C124910XX). PD assessments included VerifyNow P2Y₁₂, light transmittance aggregometry, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein.

RESULTS

Only marginal changes in plasma levels of ticagrelor (and its major active metabolite) were observed with ticagrelor: maximum plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the last measurable concentration were 38% and 30% higher, respectively, in patients receiving methylnaltrexone compared with those receiving placebo, but no differences in time to maximum plasma concentration were observed. There were no differences in P2Y₁₂ reaction units by VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ between groups at each time point, including 2 h (the primary endpoint; p = 0.261). Similarly, there were no differences in PD markers assessed by light transmittance aggregometry and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with coronary artery disease receiving morphine, intravenous administration of the peripheral opioid receptor antagonist methylnaltrexone leads to only marginal changes in plasma levels of ticagrelor and its major metabolite, without affecting levels of platelet reactivity. (Effect of Methylnaltrexone on the PK/PD Profiles of Ticagrelor in Patients Treated With Morphine; NCT02403830).

Subcutaneous fluid and drug delivery: safe, efficient and inexpensive

Patients with difficult venous access or oral intolerance and clinical situations with inadequate response to oral therapy have generated the need for alternative routes of delivery for drugs and fluids.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review examining the evidence for subcutaneous (SC) administration of drugs and/or fluids.

We used a broad search strategy using electronic databases CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane library, key terms and ‘Medical Subject Headings’ (MeSH) such as ‘subcutaneous route’, ‘hypodermoclysis’ and the name/group of the most used drugs via this route (e.g. ‘ketorolac, morphine, ceftriaxone’, ‘analgesics, opioids, antibiotics’).

We conclude that the SC route is an effective alternative for rehydration in patients with mild–moderate dehydration and offers a number of potential advantages in appropriately selected scenarios. Experience of administering drugs by this route suggests that it is well tolerated and is associated with minimal side-effects.

Effects of methylnaltrexone in patients with narcotic bowel syndrome: a pilot observational study

BACKGROUND

Narcotic bowel syndrome (NBS) describes disabling chronic severe abdominal pain that worsens despite continuing or escalating doses of opiates. Therapy is very limited.

AIM

To examine effects of blocking peripheral µ-opioid receptors on the symptomatology of patients with NBS and its safety.

METHODS

An open-label observational study was performed in four women with NBS. After a 2-week run-in period, patients were treated for 12 weeks with 8-12 mg methylnaltrexone bromide subcutaneously every other day, increasing to daily if there was poor response. Patient and physician assessment was documented, and patients completed an eight-symptom visual analogue scale weekly and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illnesses Therapy-Fatigue questionnaire for fatigue. Patients were observed for 4 weeks following withdrawal of the drug.

RESULTS

One patient was unable to tolerate the study medication because of worsening pain after injection, and withdrew. Two showed clear benefit with reduction of symptoms overall, pain, bloating, distension, nausea and tiredness, with improved satisfaction and consistency of bowel actions and fatigue scores. Both reduced analgesic usage. The third had improved ileostomy output and had no episodes of severe bloating, but pain scores remained high. All three worsened after drug withdrawal and requested retreatment. Three experienced abdominal pains of moderate severity for 30-60 min consistently within 5 min of each injection. No other adverse events were experienced.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylnaltrexone has a positive impact on symptoms in women with NBS, although treatment does induce transient pain following its administration. Larger studies are required to examine its efficacy and longer term safety in this patient group.