A multicenter phase II trial of the triplet antiemetic therapy with palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine for a cisplatin-containing regimen. - PATROL-I.

Dexamethasone is one of the key antiemetic agents and is widely used even now. However, dexamethasone has been associated with several adverse reactions even after short-term administration. Therefore, developing a steroid-free antiemetic regimen is an important issue to consider. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine in a multi-institutional phase II study. Chemotherapy-naive patients scheduled to receive cisplatin were enrolled and evaluated for the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during 120 h after chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of the study was total control (TC) in the overall phase. The key secondary endpoint was complete response (CR), which was assessed in the acute, delayed, and overall phase, respectively. Adverse events were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Eighty-five patients were enrolled from 8 centers in Japan, of which 83 were evaluable for analyses. The percentage of patients who achieved TC during the overall phase was 31.3%. CR was achieved in 61.4%, 84.3%, and 65.1% of patients during the overall, acute, and delayed phases, respectively. The most frequently reported adverse event was anorexia. The primary endpoint was below the threshold and we could not find benefit in the dexamethasone-free regimen, but CR during the overall phase was similar to that of the conventional three-drug regimen. This antiemetic regimen without dexamethasone might be an option for patients for whom corticosteroids should not be an active application.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant regulates autophagy and apoptosis via ROS/JNK in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Aprepitant, a selective NK-1R antagonist, can inhibit the growth of various tumours in vitro and in vivo. However, it remains unclear whether aprepitant has cytotoxic effects on iCCA. METHODS: We measured the expression of SP/NK-1R in clinical samples of iCCA by immunohistochemistry. Then, we detected the cytotoxic effects of aprepitant on iCCA cells via MTT, EdU and colony formation assay. We constructed a subcutaneous xenograft model of BALB/c nude mice by using HCCC-9810 and RBE cell lines to explore the effects of aprepitant in vivo. To elucidate the potential mechanisms, we explored the pro-apoptotic effect of aprepitant by flow cytometric, western blotting, ROS detection and JC-1 staining. Furthermore, we detected the autophagic level of HCCC-9810 and RBE by western blotting, mRFP-eGFP-LC3 adenovirus transfection and electron microscope. RESULTS: SP/NK-1R is significantly expressed in iCCA. Aprepitant inhibited human iCCA xenograft growth and dose-dependently decreased the viability of RBE and HCCC-9810 cells. Aprepitant-induced mitochondria-dependent apoptosis through ROS/JNK pathway. Additionally, pretreatment with z-VAD-fmk partly reversed the effect of aprepitant on cell viability, while NAC completely attenuated the cytotoxic effects of aprepitant in vitro. Furthermore, we observed the dynamic changes of autophagosome in RBE and HCCC-9810 cells treated with aprepitant. CONCLUSION: SP/NK-1R signalling is significantly activated in iCCA and promotes the proliferation of iCCA cells. By contrast, aprepitant can induce autophagy and apoptosis in iCCA cells via ROS accumulation and subsequent activation of JNK.

Safety and tolerability of intravenous aprepitant and fosaprepitant in children with cancer: A retrospective, single-center review.

NK-1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RA) are key agents for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Current pediatric practice guidelines recommend the use of intravenous fosaprepitant or oral aprepitant. However, there are reports of hypersensitivity reactions with fosaprepitant due to polysorbate 80. Intravenous aprepitant does not contain polysorbate 80, but its use in pediatric patients has not been described. In this retrospective, single-center study, 106 pediatric patients received either fosaprepitant or intravenous aprepitant as part of their antiemetic regimen. Intravenous aprepitant was well tolerated and did not lead to any instances of hypersensitivity reactions requiring discontinuation.

Perioperative use of low dose haloperidol safely reduces episodes of postoperative nausea/vomiting and length of stay following elective minimally invasive bariatric surgery.

INTRODUCTION: While total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) protocols include Dexamethasone and Ondansetron prophylaxis, bariatric patients continue to be considered at particularly high risk for postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV). A multimodal approach for prophylaxis is recommended by the Bariatric Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society however, there remains a lack of consensus on the optimal strategy to manage PONV in these patients. Haloperidol has been shown at low doses to have a therapeutic effect in treatment of refractory nausea and in PONV prophylaxis in other high risk surgical populations. We sought to investigate its efficacy as a prophylactic medication for PONV in the bariatric population and to identify which perioperative strategies were most effective at reducing episodes of PONV. METHODS: An institutional bariatric database was created by retrospectively reviewing patients undergoing elective minimally invasive bariatric procedures from 2018 to 2022. Demographic data reviewed included age, gender, preoperative body mass index (BMI), ethnicity, and primary language. Primary endpoints included patient reported episodes of PONV, total doses of Ondansetron administered, need for a second antiemetic (rescue medication), complication rate (most commonly readmission within 30 days), and length of stay. Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney test, and ANOVA were used to evaluate the effect of perioperative management on various endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 475 patients were analyzed with Haloperidol being utilized in 15.8% of all patients. Patients receiving Haloperidol were less likely to require Ondansetron outside of the immediate perioperative period (34.7% vs. 49.8%, p = 0.02), experienced less PONV (41.3% vs. 64.3%, p = 0.01) and also had a decreased median length of stay (27.3 vs. 35.8 h, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of low dose Haloperidol to Bariatric ERAS protocols decreases incidence of PONV and the need for additional antiemetic coverage resulting in a significantly shorter length of stay, increasing the likelihood of safe discharge on postoperative day 1.

Evaluation of Efficacy of Adding Aprepitant to Palonosetron and Dexamethasone in Carboplatin and Etoposide Therapy.

Although carboplatin (CBDCA) is classified as a moderately emetogenic agent, the majority of guidelines recommend the use of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist in addition to a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist with dexamethasone (DEX) for CBDCA-containing chemotherapy because of its higher emetogenic risk. However, the additional efficacy of aprepitant (APR) in CBDCA-containing treatment remains controversial, and data on multiple-day treatments are limited. Etoposide (ETP) was administered on days 1-3 in the CBDCA + ETP regimen, and it is important to evaluate suitable antiemetic therapy for the regimen. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of additional APR in CBDCA + ETP. Patients were divided into two groups and retrospectively evaluated. One was the control group, which was prophylactically administered palonosetron (PALO) and DEX, and the other was the APR group, which received APR orally with PALO and DEX. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) between the groups. The overall CR rates were 75.0 and 76.4% in the control and APR groups, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 1.00). In the acute phase, it was 88.9 and 97.2%, respectively, and 86.1 and 79.2% in the delayed phase, respectively, without significant differences (p = 0.10 and 0.38, respectively). The incidence and severity of nausea, vomiting, and anorexia were not significantly different between the two groups in the acute and delayed phases. Our findings suggest that combining APR with PALO and DEX does not improve the CR rate in CBDCA + ETP therapy.

Comparing the Efficacy of Fosnetupitant, an NK1 Receptor Antagonist in CDDP-Based Regimens, with That of Fosaprepitant and Aprepitant: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Existing antiemetic therapy against emetic-risk agents across malignancies 24 h post-dose in the acute period in cisplatin (CDDP)-based regimens yields a satisfactory complete response (CR) rate of ≥90%. However, the control rate after 24 h in the delayed period is unsatisfactory. This study compared the efficacy of fosnetupitant (F-NTP), a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist, with that of fosaprepitant (F-APR) and aprepitant (APR) in the treatment of patients with cancer at high emetic risk due to chemotherapy. In this retrospective case-control study involving patients receiving cisplatin-containing regimens and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists, patients were divided into three groups based on prophylactic antiemetic therapy: F-NTP, F-APR, and APR. The CR rate was evaluated for each period up to 168 h and further subdivided into acute (0-24 h), delayed (24-120 h), overall (0-120 h), and beyond-delayed (120-168 h) periods. Eighty-eight patients were included in the F-NTP group, 66 in the F-APR group, and 268 in the APR group. The CR rates at 0-168 and 120-168 h after cisplatin administration were significantly higher in the F-NTP group than in the F-APR and APR groups. After adjusting for confounding factors, F-NTP use was an independent factor in the multivariate analysis. Prophylactic antiemetic therapy, including F-NTP, was effective and well-tolerated during the delayed period. The efficacy of F-NTP in managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was superior to those of F-APR and APR during the study period.

Assessing the impact of aprepitant on response to dose-intensive cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DICEP).

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of aprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), its use in stem cell transplant settings across Canada is not standard. While pharmacokinetic data exists, the clinical significance of cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP 3A4) inhibition of cyclophosphamide by aprepitant is unclear. Reduced activation of cyclophosphamide may reduce the effectiveness of dose-intensive cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DICEP). OBJECTIVES: To compare response rates to DICEP in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the presence and absence of aprepitant. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who received full-dose DICEP for relapsed/refractory HL or DLBCL between June 1995 and September 2018 at the Foothills Medical Centre (FMC) in Calgary, Alberta, Canada was conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to assess response rate, as defined by the 2007 International Working Group response criteria. RESULTS: Of the 218 patients included in this study, 87.6% of patients in the control group and 88.5% of patients in the aprepitant group responded to DICEP (difference 0.025 [95% CI, -0.066 to 0.114], p = 0.827). Univariate analyses for age, sex, type of cancer, stage of cancer, number of prior relapses, and relapse status were not significant. No significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Response rates to DICEP in relapsed/refractory HL and DLBCL patients were similar regardless of aprepitant use. Considering these results and the effectiveness of aprepitant in CINV, its addition to standard antiemetic therapy in patients receiving DICEP should be given strong consideration in the transplant setting.

Efficacy of aprepitant for refractory pruritus in patients with epidermolysis bullosa and atopic dermatitis: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: At a single-center pediatric hospital, the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant was used to treat refractory pruritus in epidermolysis bullosa (EB) and atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: Thirty-seven patients were included (24 EB patients, 13 AD patients), ages 10 months to 37 years. RESULTS: 58% (14/24) of patients with EB and 85% (11/13) of patients with AD reported aprepitant was effective in decreasing their pruritus, with age-related differences in efficacy observed in EB patients, and access to the medication by insurance denial or availability of the drug as a barrier to use. CONCLUSIONS: Aprepitant shows promise in controlling refractory pruritus in pediatric EB and AD patients and deserves further study.

Effects of Selective and Mixed-Action Kappa and Delta Opioid Receptor Agonists on Pain-Related Behavioral Depression in Mice.

We recently developed a series of nalfurafine analogs (TK10, TK33, and TK35) that may serve as non-addictive candidate analgesics. These compounds are mixed-action agonists at the kappa and delta opioid receptors (KOR and DOR, respectively) and produce antinociception in a mouse warm-water tail-immersion test while failing to produce typical mu opioid receptor (MOR)-mediated side effects. The warm-water tail-immersion test is an assay of pain-stimulated behavior vulnerable to false-positive analgesic-like effects by drugs that produce motor impairment. Accordingly, this study evaluated TK10, TK33, and TK35 in a recently validated assay of pain-related behavioral depression in mice that are less vulnerable to false-positive effects. For comparison, we also evaluated the effects of the MOR agonist/analgesic hydrocodone (positive control), the neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1R) antagonist aprepitant (negative control), nalfurafine as a selective KOR agonist, SNC80 as a selective DOR agonist, and a nalfurafine/SNC80 mixture. Intraperitoneal injection of dilute lactic acid (IP lactic acid) served as a noxious stimulus to depress vertical and horizontal locomotor activity in male and female ICR mice. IP lactic acid-induced locomotor depression was alleviated by hydrocodone but not by aprepitant, nalfurafine, SNC80, the nalfurafine/SNC80 mixture, or the KOR/DOR agonists. These results suggest that caution is warranted in advancing mixed-action KOR/DOR agonists as candidate analgesics.

Impact of grinding balls on the size reduction of Aprepitant in wet ball milling procedure.

One of the widely used approaches for improving the dissolution of poorly water-soluble drugs is particle size reduction. Ball milling is a mechanical, top-down technique used to reduce particle size. The effect of ball number, ball size, and milling speed on the properties of milled Aprepitant is evaluated. A full factorial design was employed to investigate the influence of affecting factors on particle size reduction. The initial suspension was made by suspending the drug in distilled water using excipients followed by milling in a planetary ball mill. Ball size, ball number, and milling speed modulated particle size distribution of Aprepitant. Increasing the number of balls from minimum to maximum for each ball size led to approximately a 28% reduction in mean particle size, a 37% decrease in D90%, and a 25% decrease in the ratio of volume mean particle diameter to numeric mean particle diameter. On average, using 10 mm balls instead of 30 mm balls reduced mean particle size by 1.689 µm. As a result, ball size, ball number, and milling speed are three effective factors in the process of ball milling. By increasing the ball number and decreasing the ball size, efficient micronization of drug particles takes place and the particle size is more uniform.

Aprepitant inhibits the development and metastasis of gallbladder cancer via ROS and MAPK activation.

BACKGROUND: Aprepitant, as a neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) antagonist, originally applied for curing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, has been reported to have significant antitumor effect on several malignant tumors. However, the effect of aprepitant on gallbladder cancer (GBC) is not clear yet. This study aimed to investigate the anti-tumor activity of aprepitant on GBC and the potential mechanisms. METHODS: The NK-1R expression of gallbladder cancer cells were examined by immunofluorescence. MTT assay, wound healing and transwell migration assay were applied to detect the effect of aprepitant on cell proliferation, migration and invasion. Flow cytometry was used to detect the apoptosis rate. The effects of aprepitant on the expressions of cytokine were examined by real-time quantitative PCR and MAPK activation were detected via immunofluorescence and western blotting. Besides, xenograft model was established to investigate the effect of aprepitant in vivo. RESULTS: Our results indicated that NK-1R was markedly expressed in gallbladder cancer cells and aprepitant effectively inhibited the proliferation, migration and invasion. Furthermore, the apoptosis, ROS and inflammation response were significantly boosted by aprepitant in GBC. Aprepitant induced NF-κB p65 nuclear translocationin and increased the expressions of p-P65, p-Akt, p-JNK, p-ERK and p-P38, as well as the mRNA levels of inflammatory cytokines IL-1ß, IL-6 and TNF-α. Consistently, aprepitant suppressed the growth of GBC in xenograft mice model. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that aprepitant could inhibit the development of gallbladder cancer via inducing ROS and MAPK activation, which suggested that aprepitant may become a promising therapeutic drug against GBC.

Antiemetic use and chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting related hospitalization costs after highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Aim: Despite numerous available antiemetics, chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) still affects many patients, and CINV related hospitalizations and costs often result. Materials & methods: PrecisionQ analyzed its database to evaluate CINV related hospitalizations and costs following antiemetics use including netupitant/fosnetupitant with palonosetron (NEPA), aprepitant/fosaprepitant with ondansetron (APON) or aprepitant/fosaprepitant with palonosetron (APPA) in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Results: Database analysis identified 15,583 patient records (807 NEPA, 2023 APON, 12,753 APPA) and mean CINV related hospitalization costs were lower across all patients receiving NEPA (US$301) compared with patients receiving APON ($1006, p < 0.0001) or APPA ($321, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: NEPA is associated with lower CINV related hospitalization costs compared with APON and APPA among patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy patients often experience nausea and vomiting that not only has a negative impact on the patient's quality of life but can also result in unplanned hospitalizations with high associated costs. Numerous medications and specific guidelines are available to prevent nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer. Specifically, the combination of two classes of medications (serotonin inhibitors + neurokinin type 1 inhibitors) has been shown to provide the greatest benefit. However, hospitalizations due to nausea and vomiting still occur, and providers require further information to determine the best options for their patients. In this study, the combination of netupitant/fosnetupitant with palonosetron resulted in lower hospitalization costs compared with aprepitant/fosaprepitant with ondansetron or aprepitant/fosaprepitant with palonosetron in chemotherapy patients.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting: is the big little problem becoming a smaller little problem?

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) has been identified as a big (very frequently encountered) little (not linked to life-threatening outcomes) problem. Traditional drugs (dexamethasone, droperidol or similar drugs, serotonin receptor antagonists) each have significant but limited effect, leading to an increasing use of combination therapies. High-risk patients, often identified through use of risk scoring systems, remain with a significant residual risk despite combining up to three traditional drugs. A recent correspondence in this Journal proposes the use of up to five anti-emetic drugs to further minimise the risk. This disruptive strategy was supported by favourable initial results, absence of side-effects and lower acquisition costs of the added new drugs (aprepitant and palonosetron) because of their recent loss of patent protection. These results are provocative and hypothesis generating, but need confirmation and do not warrant immediate changes in clinical practice. The next steps will also necessitate wider implementation of protocols protecting patients from PONV and a search for additional drugs and techniques aimed at treating established PONV.

Assessing the impact of aprepitant and ondansetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting in orthognathic surgeries: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common side effect associated with general anesthesia. Both ondansetron and aprepitant been effectively used to prevent PONV. However, there is a disagreement of opinions regarding the superiority of these two drugs. This study aims to compare the efficacy of aprepitant with ondansetron in preventing PONV following orthognathic surgeries. METHODS: In this double-blinded clinical trial, 80 patients scheduled for orthognathic surgery at Imam Hossein Hospital, Tehran, Iran, were randomly assigned to two groups. A standardized anesthesia protocol was used for all patients. The first group received a placebo capsule administered one hour before the surgical procedure along with 4 mg (2 ml) of ondansetron intravenously after anesthesia induction. The second group was given 80 mg aprepitant capsules one hour before the surgery, followed by an injection of 2 ml intravenous distilled water after anesthesia induction. The occurrence and severity of PONV, the amount of rescue medication required, and the complete response of patients assessed within 24 h after the surgery. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographic data between the two groups. Patients in the aprepitant group had a significantly lower incidence and severity of nausea (2.5% versus 27.5%), vomiting (5% versus 25%), and required fewer rescue medications (7.5% versus 62.5%) compared to the ondansetron group. Additionally, the aprepitant group showed a higher complete response rate (90% versus 67.5%) in the 0-2 and 12-24 postoperative hours. CONCLUSION: According to the findings of this study, aprepitant has demonstrated a greater efficacy in preventing PONV following orthognathic surgery, when compared to ondansetron. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT code: IRCT20211205053279N3), date of registration: 16/12/2022.

The Repurposing of Non-Peptide Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists as Antitumor Drugs: An Urgent Challenge for Aprepitant.

The substance P (SP)/neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) system is involved in cancer progression. NK-1R, activated by SP, promotes tumor cell proliferation and migration, angiogenesis, the Warburg effect, and the prevention of apoptosis. Tumor cells overexpress NK-1R, which influences their viability. A typical specific anticancer strategy using NK-1R antagonists, irrespective of the tumor type, is possible because these antagonists block all the effects mentioned above mediated by SP on cancer cells. This review will update the information regarding using NK-1R antagonists, particularly Aprepitant, as an anticancer drug. Aprepitant shows a broad-spectrum anticancer effect against many tumor types. Aprepitant alone or in combination therapy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy could reduce the sequelae and increase the cure rate and quality of life of patients with cancer. Current data open the door to new cancer research aimed at antitumor therapeutic strategies using Aprepitant. To achieve this goal, reprofiling the antiemetic Aprepitant as an anticancer drug is urgently needed.

Improving Nursing Knowledge and Patient Education About Aprepitant's Effects on Hormonal Contraception: A Performance Improvement Project.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to improve the consistency of verbal and written discharge instructions for women of childbearing age (13-55 years) taking hormonal contraceptives who receive aprepitant perioperatively, to address the need to use a secondary form of birth control for 28 days, as well as to increase the knowledge and confidence of Registered Nurses when providing discharge instructions. DESIGN: This quality improvement project used a pre-/postdesign to evaluate two separate groups of patients and registered nurses. METHODS: The patient sample consisted of 30 total women of childbearing age who received aprepitant during the perioperative period (15 pre and 15 post). The PACU nurse sample included 15 ambulatory surgery center nurses and 58 main hospital nurses for a combined sample of 73 PACU nurses. The PACU nurses were provided with educational in-service regarding information about aprepitant and its drug interactions. PACU nurses were additionally instructed to provide patient discharge instructions using both a written and verbal format. Patients were called postoperatively before and after both the written after visit summary (AVS) changes and the PACU nurse in-services, PACU nurses were evaluated on their knowledge, confidence, and frequency of discharge teaching before and after their educational in-service. The PACU nurses were surveyed 90 days after the intervention to assess their long-term knowledge retention. FINDINGS: There was a significant increase in nurse knowledge about aprepitant from preimplementation to postimplementation (61.39% vs 81.95%, P < .001). Nursing knowledge showed a nonsignificant decline at 90-days postimplementation (81.95% vs 73.68%, P = .096) although remained significantly higher than preimplementation scores (73.68% vs 61.39%, P = .003). There was an overall 33.3% increase in the percentage of patients who were able to recall receiving aprepitant and the need to use a secondary form of birth control when comparing the preintervention group to the postintervention group (26.7% vs 60%, P = .123). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that providing a standardized presentation about aprepitant may improve the PACU nurses' ability to verbalize key information about aprepitant, including the need for patients to use a secondary form of birth control. This increase in nursing knowledge and confidence, along with improved written discharge instructions, may have led to improved patient comprehension of aprepitant discharge education. Additionally, there was an increase in the percentage of patients who were able to recall the need to use a secondary form birth control for 28 days, to reduce the likelihood of an unintentional pregnancy.

Comparison of aprepitant versus desloratadine for EGFR-TKI-induced pruritus: A randomized phase 2 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pruritus is one of the most common and challenging side effects of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) and has impaired patients' quality of life and treatment compliance. Our study evaluated the efficacy and safety of aprepitant in managing EGFR-TKIs-related pruritus. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted between December 2016 and August 2020 in China. Patients were eligible if they were 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with first onset of moderate to severe pruritus during EGFR-TKI treatment. RESULTS: A total of 130 eligible patients were randomly assigned to aprepitant (n = 65) or desloratadine (n = 65) groups. The median (interquartile range [Q1, Q3]) age was 63 (54, 70) years, and 79 (60.8%) were women. Mean visual analog scale scores at baseline were 6.35 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.89-6.82) in the aprepitant group and 5.94 (95% CI, 5.56-6.32) in the desloratadine group. After 1 week of treatment, 33 (53.2%) patients responded to aprepitant, which was significantly higher than that of 14 (23.7%) patients responded to desloratadine (p = .001). Moreover, patients in the aprepitant group had a significantly shorter response time than patients in the desloratadine group (mean [days], 13.39 [95% CI, 11.08-15.70] vs. 16.67 [95% CI, 14.19-19.13], p = .04). The most frequent drug-related adverse events in aprepitant group and desloratadine were constipation and dry mouth, and all adverse events were grade 1-2. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to prospectively present that aprepitant elicited a better and faster response and mild toxicity for managing EGFR-TKI induced pruritus than desloratadine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02646020.

Fabrication of an aprepitant nanosuspension using hydroxypropyl chitosan to increase the bioavailability.

Aprepitant has been classified into BCS class IV, which has low permeability and poor water solubility, resulting in low bioavailability. This study focused on improving its permeability and solubility in order to improve the oral bioavailability of aprepitant. Hydroxypropyl chitosan (HPCS) was used as a stabilizer for the nanosuspension and wet milling was utilized for improving aprepitant's bioavailability and solubility. The resulting nanosuspension size was 151 ± 14.5 nm and its zeta potential was 63.5 ± 0.34 Mv. The spectral characteristics (XRPD, DSC, TEM) of the nanosuspension suggested that aprepitant existed in the crystalline form and that nanosuspension had 2-fold higher solubility than aprepitant. Hydroxypropyl chitosan can significantly reduce the TEER of Caco-2 cells and the Papp of the suspension in Caco-2 cells increased by 2.2 times compared with aprepitant. The relative bioavailability of the nanosuspension was 147.7% compared with the commercial capsule.

Aprepitant is a novel, selective activator of the K2P channel TRAAK.

TRAAK (KCNK4, K2P4.1) is a mechanosensitive two-pore domain potassium (K2P) channel. Due to its expression within sensory neurons and genetic link to neuropathic pain it represents a promising potential target for novel analgesics. In common with many other channels in the wider K2P sub-family, there remains a paucity of small molecule pharmacological tools. Specifically, there is a lack of molecules selective for TRAAK over the other members of the TREK subfamily of K2P channels. We developed a thallium flux assay to allow high throughput screening of compounds and facilitate the identification of novel TRAAK activators. Using a library of ∼1200 drug like molecules we identified Aprepitant as a small molecule activator of TRAAK. Aprepitant is an NK-1 antagonist used to treat nausea and vomiting. Close structural analogues of Aprepitant and a range of NK-1 antagonists were also selected or designed for purchase or brief chemical synthesis and screened for their ability to activate TRAAK. Electrophysiology experiments confirmed that Aprepitant activates both the 'long' and 'short' transcript variants of TRAAK. We also demonstrated that Aprepitant is selective and does not activate other members of the K2P superfamily. This work describes the development of a high throughput assay to identify potential TRAAK activators and subsequent identification and confirmation of the novel TRAAK activator Aprepitant. This discovery identifies a useful tool compound which can be used to further probe the function of TRAAK K2P channels.

Aprepitant attenuates NLRC4-dependent neuronal pyroptosis via NK1R/PKCδ pathway in a mouse model of intracerebral hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Pyroptosis is a programmed cell death mediated by inflammasomes. Previous studies have reported that inhibition of neurokinin receptor 1 (NK1R) exerted neuroprotection in several neurological diseases. Herein, we have investigated the role of NK1R receptor inhibition using Aprepitant to attenuate NLRC4-dependent neuronal pyroptosis after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), as well as the underlying mechanism. METHODS: A total of 182 CD-1 mice were used. ICH was induced by injection of autologous blood into the right basal ganglia. Aprepitant, a selective antagonist of NK1R, was injected intraperitoneally at 1 h after ICH. To explore the underlying mechanism, NK1R agonist, GR73632, and protein kinase C delta (PKCδ) agonist, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA), were injected intracerebroventricularly at 1 h after ICH induction, and small interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA) for NLRC4 was administered via intracerebroventricular injection at 48 h before ICH induction, respectively. Neurobehavioral tests, western blot, and immunofluorescence staining were performed. RESULTS: The expression of endogenous NK1R and NLRC 4 were gradually increased after ICH. NK1R was expressed on neurons. Aprepitant significantly improved the short- and long-term neurobehavioral deficits after ICH, which was accompanied with decreased neuronal pyroptosis, as well as decreased expression of NLRC4, Cleaved-caspase-1, GSDMD (gasdermin D), IL-1ß, and IL-18. Activation of NK1R or PKCδ abolished these neuroprotective effects of Aprepitant after ICH. Similarly, knocking down NLRC4 using siRNA produced similar neuroprotective effects. CONCLUSION: Aprepitant suppressed NLRC4-dependent neuronal pyroptosis and improved neurological function, possibly mediated by inhibition of NK1R/PKCδ signaling pathways after ICH. The NK1R may be a promising therapeutic target for the treatment of ICH.