15-hydroxystearate micelles for the delivery of aprepitant: Preparation, characterization, pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution in mice.

This study developed a novel Aprepitant micells (APPT-Ms) formulation that uses a mixture of 15-hydroxystearate (HS15) as surfactant to solubilize AAPT. This article determines the content of APPT by HPLC. The in vitro test results show that the optimized APPT-Ms has small particle size, excellent stability and long-lasting release. At a test dose of 20mg/kg, the pharmacokinetic study of APPT-Ms showed that it accorded with first-order kinetics in mice, and its AUC value was higher than the pure AAPT about 6 times. The tissue distribution study of mice showed that the APPT-Ms had higher tissue binding ability than pure AAPT. The APPT-Ms could be rapidly distributed to various tissues and it was easier to pass through the blood-brain barrier than APPT. In this study, the APPT-Ms has high antiemetic activity and improves the compliance of patient. The pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of APPT-Ms after injection administration were studied, which may be of guiding significance for further research.

Pharmacokinetics of Dexamethasone when Administered with Fosaprepitant for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting and Differences in Dose-Dependent Antiemetic Effects.

BACKGROUND: Fosaprepitant, an NK1 receptor antagonist, inhibits and induces cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) as its substrate. Contrarily dexamethasone is metabolized by CYP3A4. Therefore, in combination therapy wherein both agents interact with each other, it is recommended that the dexamethasone dose be reduced in the first two days. Thus far, there are only a few studies on the optimum dose of dexamethasone after day 3. Thus, we aimed to determine the pharmacokinetics of dexamethasone on day3 when administered together with fosaprepitant and investigate the dose-dependent differences in its antiemetic effect in patients with cancer. METHODS: Twelve patients with esophageal, stomach, or lung cancer received primary highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We intravenously administered 9.9 mg and 6.6 mg of dexamethasone on days 1 and 2, respectively, and 6.6 mg or 13.2 mg on day 3 together with the administration of 150 mg fosaprepitant and 0.75 mg palonosetron. We assessed the pharmacokinetics of dexamethasone on day 3 by dose and examined the dose-dependent antiemetic effect. RESULTS: No differences were observed in the time-to-maximum concentration and blood half-life of dexamethasone between patient groups that received dexamethasone at doses of 6.6 mg and 13.2 mg. In contrast, the area under the blood concentration-time curve and the maximum concentration of dexamethasone correlated with its dose. Moreover, the blood dexamethasone concentration on day 3 increased by twofold after the administration of a higher dose than after a lower dose. The severity of nausea in the delayed phase significantly decreased in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSION: Administration of a higher dexamethasone dose on day 3 improved the antiemetic effect of the combined regimen in patients with cancer who underwent HEC.
.

A phase 1 pharmacokinetic study of oral NEPA, the fixed combination of netupitant and palonosetron, in Chinese healthy volunteers.

PURPOSE: Oral NEPA, the only fixed-combination antiemetic, is composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist netupitant (300 mg) and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron (0.50 mg). This study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile of netupitant and its main metabolites M1 and M3, and palonosetron in Chinese subjects. Oral NEPA tolerability and safety were also analyzed. METHODS: This was a single-center, single-dose phase 1 study in healthy, adult Chinese volunteers. Eligible subjects received oral NEPA, and blood samples were collected on day 1 predose and at various time points up until day 10 postdose. Pharmacokinetic parameters were analyzed using noncompartmental methods. For safety assessments, adverse events (AEs) were monitored during the study. RESULTS: In total 18 Chinese healthy volunteers received oral NEPA. Netupitant mean maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) [± standard deviation] of 698 ± 217 ng/mL was reached at 3-6 h, with a mean total exposure (AUC0-inf) of 22,000 ± 4410 h·ng/mL. For palonosetron, a mean Cmax of 1.8 ± 0.252 ng/mL was reached at 2-6 h postadministration, with a mean AUC0-inf of 81.0 ± 14.0 h·ng/mL. The most common treatment-related AEs in > 2 subjects were constipation (n = 9) and tiredness (n = 3). No severe AEs were observed, and no subject withdrew due to AEs. CONCLUSION: Following single-dose administration of oral NEPA in Chinese subjects, the pharmacokinetic profiles of the NEPA components were mostly similar to those reported previously in Caucasians. NEPA was well tolerated with a safety profile in line with that observed in pivotal trials in Caucasians.

Nanotechnology based blended chitosan-pectin hybrid for safe and efficient consolidative antiemetic and neuro-protective effect of meclizine hydrochloride in chemotherapy induced emesis.

The aim of this study was to formulate an easily-administered, safe and effective dosage form loaded with meclizine for treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) through the buccal route. CINV comprises bothersome side effects accompanying cytotoxic drugs administration in cancer patients. Meclizine was loaded in chitosan-pectin nanoparticles which were further incorporated within a buccal film. Different formulations were prepared based on a 21.31 full factorial study using Design Expert®8. The optimum formulation possessed favorable characters regarding its particle size (129 nm), entrapment efficiency (90%) and release profile. Moreover, its permeation efficiency through sheep buccal mucosa was assessed via Franz cell diffusion and confocal laser microscopy methods. Enhanced permeation was achieved compared with the free drug form. In-vivo performance was assessed using cyclophosphamide induced emesis. The proposed formulation exerted significant relief of the measured responses (reduced body weight and motor coordination, elevated emesis, anorexia, proinflammatory mediators and neurotransmitters that were also associated with scattered degenerated neurons and glial cells). The developed formulation ameliorated all behavioral, biochemical and histopathological changes induced by cyclophosphamide. The obtained data were promising suggesting that our bioadhesive formulation can offer an auspicious medication for treating distressing symptoms associated with chemotherapy for cancer patients.

Extrapolation of Adult Efficacy to Pediatric Patients With Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common treatment-related adverse event that negatively impacts the quality of life of cancer patients. During pediatric drug development, extrapolation of efficacy from adult to pediatric populations is a pathway that can minimize the exposure of children to unnecessary clinical trials, improve efficiency, and increase the likelihood of success in obtaining a pediatric indication. The acceptability of the use of extrapolation depends on a series of evidence-based assumptions regarding the similarity of disease, response to intervention, and exposure-response relationships between adult and pediatric patients. This study evaluated publicly available summaries of data submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration for drugs approved for CINV to assess the feasibility of extrapolation for future development programs. Extracted data included trial design, emetogenic potential of chemotherapy, primary end points, participant enrollment criteria, and antiemetic pharmacokinetics. Adult and pediatric clinical trial designs for assessment of efficacy and safety shared key design elements. Antiemetic drugs found to be efficacious in adults were also efficacious in pediatric patients. Systemic drug concentrations at approved doses were similar for ondansetron, granisetron, and aprepitant, but an exposure-response analysis of palonosetron in children suggested that higher palonosetron systemic exposure is necessary for the prevention of CINV in the pediatric population. For 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist antiemetic drugs, efficacy in adults predicts efficacy in children, supporting the extrapolation of effectiveness of an antiemetic product in children from adequate and well-controlled studies in adult patients with CINV.

Sustained release formulation of Ondansetron HCl using osmotic drug delivery approach.

Ondansetron HCl (OSH) is a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist indicated for the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with radiotherapy (adults: 8 mg, t.i.d) and/or chemotherapy (adults: 8 mg, b.i.d to t.i.d) and prevention of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting (adults: 8 mg, b.i.d). In elderly subjects, bioavailability may be somewhat higher (65%) and lower clearance, presumably due to reduced hepatic first-pass metabolism. OSH is extensively distributed in the body; about 70-75% of the drug in plasma is protein-bound and terminal elimination half-life is about 3 h after oral administration. The study was aimed to develop Push-pull Osmotic Pump (PPOP) bi-layered tablets for Ondansetron HCl ER tablets. The granulation was carried out using non-aqeous solvents followed by compression, seal coating, semi permeable coating, laser drilling (0.6 mm), and drug film coating with loading dose. The drug release was controlled by swelleable osmotic polymers of pull layer and push layer and orifice on the surface of tablet. The formulations were optimized for its core composition, extended release coating (Semipermeable membrane) polymer as to plasticizer ratio and orifice diameter. Optimized formulations were evaluated for micromeritic properties and in vitro drug release. The analytical methods were developed and validated to estimate in vitro drug potency, drug release, and in vivo pharmacokinetic parameters. Stability studies were done as per the ICH guidelines. The results of in vivo study concludes that the once OSH ER dose consistently maintains plasma concentration of drug within the therapeutic window over a period of 24 h.

The safety of rolapitant for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy.

Introduction: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a significant clinical issue that affects patients' quality of life as well as treatment decisions. Significant improvements in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting have occurred in the past 15 years with the introduction of new antiemetic agents 5-HT3, receptor antagonists, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and olanzapine. Oral (aprepitant, 2003; netupitant, 2014; rolapitant, 2015) neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists have been developed along with intravenous formulations (fosaprepitant, NEPA, rolapitant, HTX-019) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.Areas covered: This review presents a description of the safety and efficacy of rolapitant along with a comparison to the other oral and intravenous formulations of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists.Expert opinion: Oral rolapitant has been demonstrated in clinical trials to be safe and effective in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Rolapitant has a longer half-life (180 h) than other commercially available NK-1 receptor antagonists and does not induce or inhibit CYP34A, unlike the other NK-1 receptor antagonists. Future studies may determine if these may be important clinical issues.

Pharmacokinetic profile and safety of intravenous NEPA, a fixed combination of fosnetupitant and palonosetron, in cancer patients: Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

NEPA is the fixed combination antiemetic composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist netupitant and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron. The intravenous (i.v.) formulation of NEPA (fosnetupitant 235 mg/palonosetron 0.25 mg) was developed to enhance the convenience of NEPA administration. In a phase 3 study, i.v. NEPA showed acceptable safety with low risk for injection-site reactions. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety of i.v. NEPA in cancer patients. This was a single-center, single-dose phase 1 study in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Patients received a 30-min infusion of i.v. NEPA plus oral dexamethasone (12 mg) prior to chemotherapy, and oral dexamethasone (8 mg/daily) on days 2-4. Twenty-four patients received the complete i.v. NEPA infusion volume. Fosnetupitant maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was reached at the end of infusion and decreased to <1% of Cmax 30 min later. Netupitant was rapidly released from its prodrug and Cmax of 590 ng/ml was reached at the end of fosnetupitant infusion, with a mean exposure (AUC∞) of 15,588 h∙ng/ml. Palonosetron Cmax was reached at the end of infusion, with a mean AUC∞ of 36.07 h∙ng/ml. The most common adverse events were constipation (29%), nausea (17%), and vasospasm (8%). No i.v. NEPA-related injection site reactions occurred. Fosnetupitant conversion to netupitant occurred rapidly in cancer patients. Netupitant and palonosetron pharmacokinetic profiles in i.v. NEPA were similar to those reported for oral NEPA. i.v. NEPA was well tolerated with a similar safety profile to oral NEPA. i.v. NEPA provides additional administration convenience. Clinical trial registration number: EudraCT 2015-004750-18.

Multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study of fosnetupitant in combination with palonosetron for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The current randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety profile of a single intravenous administration of fosnetupitant, a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist prodrug, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Japanese patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients scheduled to receive cisplatin (at a dose of ≥70 mg/m2 )-based regimens were randomly assigned to receive fosnetupitant at a dose of 81 mg or 235 mg or placebo in combination with palonosetron at a dose of 0.75 mg and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no vomiting and no rescue medication) during the overall phase (0-120 hours). The overall CR rate was compared between each dose of fosnetupitant and the placebo group adjusting for the stratification factors of sex and age class (age <55 years vs age ≥55 years). Safety was assessed, with special attention given to events that potentially were suggestive of infusion site reactions. RESULTS: A total of 594 patients were randomized. Of these, 194 patients, 195 patients, and 195 patients, respectively, in the placebo and fosnetupitant 81-mg and 235-mg dose groups were evaluable for efficacy. The overall CR rate was 54.7% for the placebo group, 63.8% for the fosnetupitant 81-mg dose group (adjusted difference, 9.1%; 95% CI, -0.4% to 18.6% [P = .061]), and 76.8% for the fosnetupitant 235-mg dose group (adjusted difference, 22.0%; 97.5% CI, 11.7% to 32.3% [P < .001]). Safety profiles were comparable between the 3 groups. The incidence of infusion site reactions related to fosnetupitant was ≤1% in each dose group. CONCLUSIONS: Fosnetupitant at a dose of 235 mg provided superior prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy compared with the control group, and with a satisfactory safety profile.

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Current antiemetic regimens are less effective in children than in adults. Fosaprepitant was recently approved for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children aged six months and older. PROCEDURE: The pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) profile, safety, and tolerability of a single intravenous dose of fosaprepitant administered concomitantly with ondansetron with/without dexamethasone were evaluated in pediatric patients with cancer receiving emetogenic chemotherapy. PK/PD from three doses of fosaprepitant (3.0, 1.2, and 0.4 mg/kg, up to 150, 60, and 20 mg, respectively) were compared with placebo in 2- to 17-year-old subjects; an open-label amendment evaluated a fourth dose (5.0 mg/kg, up to 150 mg) in those under 12 years old. Historical adult PK data were used for comparison. Efficacy was measured as an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: PK data were evaluable for 167/234 subjects who completed cycle one. Aprepitant exposures were dose proportional; adolescents (12 to 17 years) receiving fosaprepitant 150 mg had exposures similar to adults at the same dose. Higher weight-normalized doses (5 mg/kg) were necessary for children aged < 12 years to achieve comparable adult exposures. The adverse event profile was typical of cancer patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 16 (6.8%) subjects, with hiccups being most common (n = 5; 2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous fosaprepitant was well tolerated by pediatric subjects with cancer, and dose-proportional exposures were observed. Subjects < 12 years old required higher doses to achieve comparable adult exposures.

Timing flexibility of oral NEPA, netupitant-palonosetron combination, administration for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

PURPOSE: The administration timing of antiemetic and chemotherapeutic regimens is often determined by regulatory indications, based on registration studies. Oral NEPA, fixed combination of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) netupitant and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 RA (5-HT3RA) palonosetron, is recommended to be administered approximately 60 min before chemotherapy. Reducing chair time for chemotherapy administration at oncology day therapy units would improve facility efficiency without compromising patient symptom management. The objective was to determine if oral NEPA can be administered closer to chemotherapy initiation without compromising patient symptom management. METHODS: NK1 receptor occupancy (NK1RO) time course in the brain was determined using positron emission tomography; netupitant and palonosetron plasma concentration-time profiles were described by pharmacokinetic (PK) models; and the rate, extent, and duration of RO by netupitant and palonosetron were predicted by pharmacodynamic modeling. Clinical efficacy data from a pivotal study in cisplatin and oral NEPA-receiving patients were reviewed in the context of symptom management. RESULTS: Striatal 90% NK1RO, assumed to correlate with NK1RA antiemetic efficacy, was predicted at netupitant plasma concentration of 225 ng/mL, reached at 2.23 h following NEPA administration. Palonosetron 90% 5-HT3RO was predicted at a 188-ng/L plasma concentration, reached at 1.05 h postdose. The mean time to first treatment failure for the 1.5% of NEPA-treated patients without complete response receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy was 8 h. Antiemetic efficacy was sustained over 5 days despite the expected decrease of NK1RO and 5-HT3RO. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that administering oral NEPA closer to initiation of cisplatin administration would provide similar antiemetic efficacy. Prospective clinical validation is required.

Implications of Pharmacogenomics to the Management of IBS.

The objectives are to review the role of pharmacogenomics in drug metabolism of medications typically used in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) focusing predominantly on cytochrome P450 metabolism. Other aims are to provide examples of genetic variation of receptors or intermediary pathways that are targets for IBS drugs and to critically appraise the situations where precision medicine is impacting health in IBS. Pharmacogenomics impacts both pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Although large clinical trials have not incorporated testing for genetic variations that could impact the efficacy of medications in IBS, there are therapeutic advantages to inclusion of pharmacogenomics testing for individual patients, as has been demonstrated particularly in the treatment with central neuromodulators in psychiatry practice. Clinical practice in IBS is moving in the same direction with the aid of commercially available tests focused on drug metabolism. Specific mechanisms leading to pathophysiology of IBS are still poorly characterized, relative to diseases such as cancer and inflammatory bowel disease, and, therefore, pharmacogenomics related to drug pharmacodynamics is still in its infancy and requires extensive future research. With increased attention to pharmacogenomics affecting drug metabolism, it is anticipated that pharmacogenomics will impact care of IBS.

Absorption, metabolism, and excretion of the antiemetic rolapitant, a selective neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, in healthy male subjects.

Rolapitant is a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist that is approved in combination with other antiemetic agents in adults for the prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with initial and repeat courses of emetogenic cancer chemotherapy, including but not limited to highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Here, we assessed the absorption, metabolism, and excretion of 14C-labeled rolapitant in healthy male subjects. Rolapitant was administered as a single 180-mg oral dose containing approximately 100 µCi of total radioactivity, with plasma, urine, and fecal samples collected at defined intervals after dosing. Rolapitant had a large apparent volume of distribution, indicating that it is widely distributed into body tissues. Rolapitant was slowly metabolized and eliminated with a mean half-life of 186 h. Exposure to the major metabolite of rolapitant, C4-pyrrolidinyl hydroxylated rolapitant or M19, was approximately 50% of rolapitant exposure in plasma. Renal clearance was not a significant elimination route for rolapitant-related entities. Total radioactivity recovered in urine accounted for 14.2% of the dose, compared to 72.7% recovery in feces. Adverse events (AEs) were generally mild; there were no serious AEs, and no clinically significant changes in laboratory or electrocardiogram parameters were observed. The combination of rolapitant safety, its long half-life, extensive tissue distribution, and slow elimination via the hepatobiliary route (rather than renal excretion) suggest suitability that a single dose of rolapitant may provide protection against CINV beyond the first 24 h after chemotherapy administration.

Complementary Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Netupitant and Palonosetron Support the Rationale for Their Oral Fixed Combination for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting.

NEPA is the first fixed-combination antiemetic composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist netupitant (netupitant; 300 mg) and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron (palonosetron; 0.50 mg). This study evaluated the pharmacokinetic profiles of netupitant and palonosetron. The pharmacokinetic profiles of both drugs were summarized using data from phase 1-3 clinical trials. netupitant and palonosetron have high absolute bioavailability (63%-87% and 97%, respectively). Their overall systemic exposures and maximum plasma concentrations are similar under fed and fasting conditions. netupitant binds to plasma proteins in a high degree (>99%), whereas palonosetron binds to a low extent (62%). Both drugs have large volumes of distribution (cancer patients: 1656-2257 L and 483-679 L, respectively). netupitant is metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A4 to 3 major pharmacologically active metabolites (M1, M2, and M3). palonosetron is metabolized by cytochrome P450 2D6 to 2 major substantially inactive metabolites (M4 and M9). Both drugs have similar intermediate-to-low systemic clearances and long half-lives (cancer patients: netupitant, 19.5-20.8 L/h and 56.0-93.8 hours; palonosetron: 7.0-11.3 L/h and 43.8-65.7 hours, respectively). netupitant and its metabolites are eliminated via the hepatic/biliary route (87% of the administered dose), whereas palonosetron and its metabolites are mainly eliminated via the kidneys (85%-93%). Altogether, these data explain the lack of pharmacokinetic interactions between netupitant and palonosetron at absorption, binding, metabolic, or excretory level, thus highlighting their compatibility as the oral fixed combination NEPA, with administration convenience that may reduce dosing mistakes and increase treatment compliance.

A Phase 1 Assessment of the QT Interval in Healthy Adults Following Exposure to Rolapitant, a Cancer Supportive Care Antiemetic.

This 2-part study evaluated the QT/QTc prolongation potential and safety and pharmacokinetics of the antiemetic rolapitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist. Part 1 was a randomized, placebo-controlled single-dose-escalation study assessing the safety of a single high dose of rolapitant. Part 2 was a randomized, placebo- and positive-controlled, double-blind parallel-group study including 4 treatment arms: rolapitant at the highest safe dose established in part 1, placebo, moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control), and rolapitant at the presumed therapeutic dose (180 mg). Among 184 adults, rolapitant was absorbed following oral administration under fasting conditions, with a median Tmax of 4 to 6 hours (range, 2-8 hours) and was safe at all doses up to 720 mg. No differences in mean change in QTcF were observed between placebo and rolapitant from baseline or at any point. At any point, the upper bound of the confidence interval for the mean difference between placebo and rolapitant was no greater than 4.4 milliseconds, and the mean difference between placebo and rolapitant was no greater than 1.7 milliseconds, suggesting an insignificant change in QTc with rolapitant. Rolapitant is safe and does not prolong the QT interval at doses up to 720 mg relative to placebo in healthy adults.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of aprepitant for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in pediatric subjects.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This multicenter, randomized, partially-blinded phase IIb study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of aprepitant in pediatric subjects for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: Subjects aged birth to 17 years scheduled to undergo surgery and receive general anesthesia with ≥1 risk factor for PONV were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 aprepitant dose regimens (a single oral dose of aprepitant equivalent to adult doses of 10 mg, 40 mg, or 125 mg), or a control regimen of ondansetron before anesthesia. Assessments included PK, safety, and exploratory efficacy (complete response [CR; no emesis, retching, or dry heaves and no rescue therapy within 0-24 h following surgery] and no vomiting [NV; no emesis, retching, or dry heaves within 0-24 h following surgery]). RESULTS: Of 220 randomized and treated subjects, 119 receiving a single aprepitant dose were sampled for PK analysis and had evaluable aprepitant plasma concentrations. A dose-dependent relationship in exposure (AUC0-8 h and Cmax) was observed. Aprepitant was generally well tolerated, and the CR and NV rates were high (>80%) across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: PK, safety, and preliminary efficacy analyses support further clinical evaluation of aprepitant for PONV prophylaxis in pediatric patients. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV ID: NCT01732458 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level I.

Ondansetron and teratogenicity in rats: Evidence for a mechanism mediated via embryonic hERG blockade.

The potent hERG channel blocking drug ondansetron is used off-label for treatment of nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy. Some human epidemiological studies have associated ondansetron with fetal cardiovascular defects and orofacial clefts. This study investigated the effects of ondanestron on embryonic heart rhythm of gestational day (GD) 13 rat embryos in vitro and then integrated the results with published animal teratology, and animal and human pharmacokinetic studies to perform a risk evaluation. Ondansetron caused concentration dependent bradycardia and arrhythmia. Cardiovascular malformations in rats occurred at exposures slightly higher than those in early human pregnancy. Together the results suggest that ondansetron can have teratogenic potential in rats and humans mediated via hERG block and severe heart rhythm disturbances in the embryo. The risk may be increased in human pregnancy if additional risk factors are present such as hypokalemia.

Synthesis, Characterization and Biocompatibility of N-palmitoyl L-alanine-based Organogels as Sustained Implants of Granisetron and Evaluation of thier Antiemetic Effect.

PURPOSE: To assess the gelation power of N-palmitoyl L-alanine derivatives in injectable oils and to use the best chosen organogel as parenteral implant of granisetron for the treatment of emesis. METHODS: Twelve N-palmitoyl L-alanine derived organogels were developed and evaluated in terms of morphology, thermal properties and in vivo performance. The ability of the selected formula to form in situ gel upon subcutaneous injection in rats and its biocompatibility were monitored over 2 weeks by histopathological examination of the injection site. RESULTS: The acid derivative (N-palmitoyl L-alanine; PA) was superior to ester derivatives. The chosen formula (PA/safflower oil 10% w/v) was successful in forming an in situ gel of granisetron when subcutaneously injected in rats, lasting for 2 weeks and proved to be biocompatible by histopathological examination. Moreover, it exerted an extended antiemetic activity by decreasing the cisplatin-induced pica for a duration of 96 h and reduced preprotachykinin A mRNA expression and Substance P level for up to 4 days (gastric tissue) or 5 days (medulla oblongata) in rats. CONCLUSION: Granisetron organogel could be considered as a safe, sustained-release and supportive anticancer treatment in both acute and chronic emesis as well as an accompanying treatment with chemotherapeutics in cancer cases.

Drug-drug interactions with aprepitant in antiemetic prophylaxis for chemotherapy.

In the current guidelines to prevent hemotherapyinduced nausea and vomiting, multiple antiemetic drugs are administered simultaneously. In patients who receive highly emetogenic chemotherapy, aprepitant, an NK1-receptor antagonist, is combined with ondansetron and dexamethasone. Aprepitant can influence the pharmacokinetics of other drugs, as it is an inhibitor and inducer of CYP3A4. Some anticancer drugs and other co-medication frequently used in cancer patients are CYP3A4 or CYP29C substrates. We give an overview of the metabolism and current data on clinically relevant drug-drug interactions with aprepitant during chemotherapy. Physicians should be aware of the potential risk of drug-drug interactions with aprepitant, especially in regimens with curative intent. More research should be performed on drug-drug interactions with aprepitant and their clinical consequences to make evidence-based recommendations.

Sugammadex Improves Neuromuscular Function in Patients Receiving Perioperative Steroids.

CONTEXT: Sugammadex has steroid-encapsulating effect. AIM: This study was undertaken to assess whether the clinical efficacy of sugammadex was altered by the administration of steroids. SETTING AND DESIGN: Sixty patients between 18 and 60 years of age with the American Society of Anesthesiologists I-IV and undergoing elective direct laryngoscopy/biopsy were included in this study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were assigned to two groups based on the intraoperative steroid use: those who received steroid (Group S) and who did not (Group C). After standard general anesthesia, patients were monitored with the train of four (TOF) monitoring. The preferred steroid and its dose, timing of steroid administration, and TOF value before and after sugammadex as well as the time to recovery (TOF of 0.9) were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: SPSS software version 17.0 was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: There is no statistically significant difference between groups in terms of age, gender, preoperative medication use, and TOF ratio just before administering sugammadex. The reached time to TOF 0.9 after sugammadex administration was significantly shorter in Group S than Group C (P < 0.05). A within-group comparison in Group S showed no difference in TOF ratio immediately before sugammadex as well as the dose of sugammadex in those who received prednisolone; time to TOF 0.9 was higher in prednisolone receivers as compared to dexamethasone receivers (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients receiving steroids, and particularly dexamethasone, an earlier reversal of neuromuscular block by sugammadex was found, in contrast with what one expect. Further studies are required to determine the cause of this effect which is probably due to a potential interaction between sugammadex and steroids.