Commonly used antiemetics for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting after Caesarean delivery with neuraxial morphine: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dopamine antagonists, 5-HT3 antagonists, and dexamethasone are frequently used in obstetrics to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). However, the superiority of any drug class is yet to be established. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of these antiemetics for PONV prophylaxis in women receiving neuraxial morphine for Caesarean delivery. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Wanfang Data for eligible randomised controlled trials. Primary outcomes were the incidences of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) within 24 h after surgery. We used a Bayesian random-effects model and calculated odds ratios with 95% credible intervals for dichotomous data. We performed sensitivity and subgroup analyses for primary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies with 4238 women were included. In the primary analyses of all women, 5-HT3 antagonists, dopamine antagonists, dexamethasone, and 5-HT3 antagonists plus dexamethasone significantly reduced PON and POV compared with placebo, and 5-HT3 antagonists plus dexamethasone were more effective than monotherapy. In the subgroup analyses, similar results were seen in women receiving epidural morphine or intrathecal morphine alone but not in women receiving intrathecal morphine with fentanyl or sufentanil. However, most included studies had some concerns or a high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of the evidence was low or very low. CONCLUSIONS: Combined 5-HT3 antagonists plus dexamethasone are more effective than monotherapy in preventing PONV associated with neuraxial morphine after Caesarean delivery. Future studies are needed to determine the role of prophylactic antiemetics in women receiving intrathecal morphine and lipophilic opioids. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42023454602.

Comparison of prophylaxis strategy for postoperative nausea and vomiting and its incidence before and after the implementation of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 in surgical setting: a single-center, retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the association between adherence to guideline-recommended risk-based postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis, the antiemetics used for PONV prophylaxis, and the incidence of PONV in patients who were underwent general anesthesia before and after 5-HT3 receptor antagonists became available. METHODS: Patients (≥ 20 years old) who were extubated after scheduled surgery and returned to general wards between January 2021 and February 2022 and between June 2022 and July 2023 were included. Risk factors included age < 50, female, motion sickness, nonsmoker, surgical factors, and postoperative opioid use. Two and three or more prophylaxis were recommended for patients with one or two and three or more risk factors, respectively. The primary outcome was the number of patients who received adequate prophylaxis, and the secondary outcomes were antiemetic agents used during anesthesia and the incidence of PONV on postoperative days 0 and 1. PONV was defined as documented PONV or rescue antiemetic administration. RESULTS: From January 2021 to February 2022 and from June 2022 to July 2023, 2342 and 2682 patients were included, respectively. Before ondansetron became available, more D2 receptor antagonists were used (p < 0.001), and after ondansetron became available, both ondansetron (p < 0.001) and propofol (p < 0.001) were given more frequently. Before and after ondansetron became available, the number of patients with adequate prophylaxis was 3.7% and 9.2%, respectively (p < 0.001), and the incidence of PONV on postoperative days 0 and 1 was 44.6% and 44.0%, respectively (p = 0.67). CONCLUSION: The availability of ondansetron increased the number of patients with adequate PONV prophylaxis, but did not decrease the incidence of PONV.

Palonosetron for prevention of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common adverse events in patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy. Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), has demonstrated non-inferiority to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs for CINV in pediatric patients. Although palonosetron has a long half-life and prolonged antiemetic action, its efficacy against delayed CINV in pediatric patients is not well understood. Therefore, this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate the efficacy of palonosetron for delayed CINV in pediatric patients. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was performed. A meta-analysis was performed using forest plots, and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A funnel plot was constructed to explore publication bias. RESULTS: The literature search retrieved 842 records, of which 23 full-text articles were assessed, including six RCTs. Meta-analysis of four RCTs that reported on the complete response (CR: defined as no emesis and no rescue medication) rate for delayed CINV revealed that palonosetron was statistically superior to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs (RR = 1.21 [95% CI 1.09-1.35]; p < 0.01). Although the number of studies included was small, no publication bias was observed in the funnel plots. In addition, the CR rate for overall and acute CINV was also significantly higher for palonosetron (RR = 1.25 [95% CI 1.01-1.54]; p = 0.04 and RR = 1.06 [95% CI 1.01-1.12]; p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Palonosetron is effective in the prophylaxis of delayed CINV in pediatric patients.

Effects of adding a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to 5 mg olanzapine, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone for preventing carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine has been reported to be an effective antiemetic in patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) added to olanzapine, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), and dexamethasone (DEX) has not been proven. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NK1RA, in combination with three-drug antiemetic regimens containing olanzapine, in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Data were pooled for 140 patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy from three multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The propensity score of the co-administration of NK1RA was estimated for each patient using a logistic regression model that included age, sex, and carboplatin dose. We analyzed a total of 62 patients, who were treated without NK1RA (non-NK1RA group: 31 patients) and with NK1RA (NK1RA group: 31 patients). The patients were selected using propensity score matching. RESULTS: The complete response rate (without emetic episodes or with no administration of rescue medication) in the overall period (0-120 h post carboplatin administration) was 93.5% in the non-NK1RA group and 96.8% in the NK1RA group, with a difference of -3.2% (95% confidence interval, -18.7% to 10.9%; P = 1.000). In terms of safety, there was no significant difference between the groups in daytime sleepiness and concentration impairment, which are the most worrisome adverse events induced by olanzapine. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that antiemetic regimens consisting of olanzapine, 5HT3RA, and DEX without NK1RA may be a treatment option for patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Study protocol for a double-blind, comparative, randomised Japanese trial of triplet standard antiemetic therapies with or without 5 mg olanzapine to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting for patients with breast cancer treated with an anthracycline/cyclophosphamide regimen (JTOP-B).

INTRODUCTION: Triple antiemetic therapy with neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone has been widely recommended for high emetogenic chemotherapeutic (HEC) agents and regimens, including anthracycline combined with cyclophosphamide (AC). The addition of olanzapine (OLZ) 5 mg or 10 mg to the recommended triple antiemetic therapy has demonstrated superiority in antiemetic efficacy compared with the standard triplet therapy for a cisplatin-based HEC regimen. Although OLZ plus the triple antiemetic treatment may also be effective for patients on an AC-based HEC regimen, no study has investigated its efficacy at a lower dose of 5 mg. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To assess whether 5 mg OLZ, as compared with placebo, in combination with triple combination therapy, significantly improves nausea and vomiting, we are conducting a randomised, parallel-group controlled clinical trial with a total of 500 patients at 15 study centres in Japan. The primary outcome is the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue medication during 120 hours after the initiation of chemotherapy. Treatment group comparison for the primary endpoint will be done by using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the institutional review board of Juntendo University Hospital and relevant approval was obtained from all participating centres. All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. The trial results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) jRCT1031200134; protocol date: 30 July 2020, version: 1.3, approval: 25 August 2020.

Analgesic effects of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist in an animal model of complex regional pain syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is caused by injuries from fracture after trauma and orthopaedic surgical procedures in the hind limbs. The symptoms of CRPS include warmth, pain, allodynia, and hyperalgesia. It is known that 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptors contribute to hyperalgesia, but their role has not yet been fully elucidated. This study investigated the mechanism of pain relief when a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist was administered in a CRPS animal model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To establish a CRPS animal model, 10-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats were used in the experiment. On the fourth week post tibial fracture surgery, we performed the von Frey test to measure mechanical allodynia. After performing behavioural tests, we collected blood and tissue samples after sacrificing the animals. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and western blot were also performed. RESULTS: The experimental tibia fracture model-induced CRPS animals elicited increased 5-HT3 receptor expression, and the 5-HT transporter was decreased in the brain stem after 4 weeks of surgical intervention. Additionally, in CRPS-induced animals, both the concentration of substance P and the level of interleukin 6 were increased peripherally and centrally. Treatment with the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ramosetron, exerted an analgesic effect in the paw withdrawal test and was dependent on the attenuation of the 5-HT3 receptor population with inflammatory pain mediators. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that treatment with the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ramosetron, in experimental CRPS animal models alleviated pain-related behaviours and may be a new therapeutic option or potential therapeutic agent for patients with CRPS.

Structure-Based Design and Optimization of FPPQ, a Dual-Acting 5-HT3 and 5-HT6 Receptor Antagonist with Antipsychotic and Procognitive Properties.

In line with recent clinical trials demonstrating that ondansetron, a 5-HT3 receptor (5-HT3R) antagonist, ameliorates cognitive deficits of schizophrenia and the known procognitive effects of 5-HT6 receptor (5-HT6R) antagonists, we applied the hybridization strategy to design dual-acting 5-HT3/5-HT6R antagonists. We identified the first-in-class compound FPPQ, which behaves as a 5-HT3R antagonist and a neutral antagonist 5-HT6R of the Gs pathway. FPPQ shows selectivity over 87 targets and decent brain penetration. Likewise, FPPQ inhibits phencyclidine (PCP)-induced hyperactivity and displays procognitive properties in the novel object recognition task. In contrast to FPPQ, neither 5-HT6R inverse agonist SB399885 nor neutral 5-HT6R antagonist CPPQ reversed (PCP)-induced hyperactivity. Thus, combination of 5-HT3R antagonism and 5-HT6R antagonism, exemplified by FPPQ, contributes to alleviating the positive-like symptoms. Present findings reveal critical structural features useful in a rational polypharmacological approach to target 5-HT3/5-HT6 receptors and encourage further studies on dual-acting 5-HT3/5-HT6R antagonists for the treatment of psychiatric disorders.

Effectiveness of palonosetron versus granisetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) commonly occurs after chemotherapy, adversely affecting patients' quality of life. Recently, studies have shown inconsistent antiemetic effects of two common 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonists, namely, palonosetron and granisetron. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of palonosetron versus granisetron in preventing CINV. METHODS: Relevant studies were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary outcome was the complete response (CR) rate. Secondary outcomes were headache and constipation events. RESULTS: In total, 12 randomized controlled trials and five retrospective studies were reviewed. Palonosetron was consistently statistically superior to granisetron in all phases in terms of the CR rate (acute phases: odds ratio [OR] = 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06-1.54; delayed phases: OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.13-1.69; and overall phases: OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.17-1.60). Moreover, a non-significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the headache event, but the occurrence of the constipation event was lower in the granisetron group than in the palonosetron group. CONCLUSION: Palonosetron showed a higher protective efficacy in all phases of CINV prevention, especially in delayed phases, and no relatively severe adverse effects were observed.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the real-world setting in Spain.

PURPOSE: Proper monitoring and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with antiemetics is crucial for cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the use of antiemetics for the treatment of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) including carboplatin in the real-world setting in Spain. METHODS: A representative panel of cancer specialists was asked to collect information about the antiemetic treatments provided to patients receiving chemotherapy. Records formed part of the Global Oncology Monitor© database (Ipsos Healthcare, London, UK). Chemotherapy data were extrapolated using Ipsos Healthcare's projection methodology. RESULTS: A total of 73 experts were finally included. Data from 9519 patients, estimated to be representative of 202,084 patients, were collected. HEC (and carboplatin-based chemotherapy) was administered to 73,118 (36%) patients, cisplatin-based therapy being the most frequent treatment (n = 34,649, 47.38%). Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) alone or in combination were used as prophylaxis for CINV in 14,762 (20%) patients, while the combination of NK1RA with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RAs) and dexamethasone as recommended by the international guidelines was used in 5849 (8%) patients only. No antiemetic prophylaxis was administered to 8.46% of the patients receiving HEC (n = 6189). Physicians classified cisplatin-, anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC-), and carboplatin-based regimens as HEC in 63%, 22% and 4% of the cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of NK1RA-containing regimens for CINV prevention in patients treated with HEC was less than expected, suggesting poor adherence to international antiemetic guidelines.

Anterior resection syndrome: a randomized clinical trial of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (ramosetron) in male patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: No effective treatment exists for anterior resection syndrome (ARS) following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. This RCT assessed the safety and efficacy of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ramosetron, for ARS. METHODS: A single-centre, randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel group trial was conducted. Male patients with ARS 1 month after rectal cancer surgery or ileostomy reversal were enrolled and randomly assigned (1 : 1) to 5 µg of ramosetron (Irribow®) daily or conservative treatment for 4 weeks. Low ARS (LARS) score was calculated after randomization and 4 weeks after treatment. The study was designed as a superiority test with a primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with major LARS between the groups. Primary outcome analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events during the study. RESULTS: : A total of 100 patients were randomized to the ramosetron (49 patients) or conservative treatment group (51 patients). Two patients were excluded, and 48 and 50 patients were analysed in the ramosetron and control groups, respectively. The proportion of major LARS after 4 weeks was 58 per cent (28 of 48 patients) in the ramosetron group versus 82 per cent (41 of 50 patients) in the control group, with a difference of 23.7 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 5.58 to 39.98, P = 0.011). There were minor adverse events in five patients, which were hard stool, frequent stool or anal pain. These were not different between the two groups. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: : Ramosetron could be safe and feasible for male patients with ARS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869984 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Pathogenesis, Recommendations, and New Trends.

The significant physical and emotional effects of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are experienced by cancer patients. Severe symptoms decrease the patient's quality of life and potentially deters further treatment. The five main forms of CINV (i.e., acute, delayed, anticipatory, breakthrough, and refractory) require different treatment regimens, which often include 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids. Despite a significant amount of research and development of antiemetic agents, management of CINV remains a great challenge with many needs waiting to be adequately addressed, such as controlling non-acute CINV, developing appropriate CINV treatment protocols for multiple-day chemotherapy patients, and providing options for those prone to CINV despite treatment. Further research is required to optimize CINV management for these patients.

5HT3 RA plus dexamethasone plus aprepitant for controlling delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in colorectal cancer.

Delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is not well controlled in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing oxaliplatin (L-OHP)-based chemotherapy. Whether neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist addition to a first-generation 5HT3 antagonist (1st 5-HT3 RA) and dexamethasone (DEX) is beneficial to these patients remains controversial. Furthermore, whether palonosetron (PALO) or aprepitant (APR) is more effective in controlling delayed CINV is unclear. We, therefore, investigated whether PALO+DEX or 1st 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR was more effective in controlling delayed CINV, and the risk factors for delayed CINV, in CRC patients undergoing L-OHP-based chemotherapy. Data were pooled from two prospective observational Japanese studies and a phase III trial to compare CINV incidence between the PALO + DEX (PALO) and 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR (APR) groups by propensity score-matched analysis. CINV risk factors were identified using logistic regression models. The CINV incidence was higher in the PALO group than in the APR group. Logistic regression analysis revealed alcohol consumption, motion sickness, and the PALO+DEX regimen as independent risk factors for delayed nausea, and female sex and the PALO+DEX regimen as those for delayed vomiting. Compared with prophylactic PALO + DEX, 1st 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR was more effective in controlling delayed CINV. Thus, CRC patients receiving L-OHP-based chemotherapy should be treated with three antiemetics, including APR.

Evaluation of the Antiemetic Effect of Premedication Optimized by Pharmaceutical Support in Cisplatin Regimens.

Cisplatin is classified as a drug with high emetic risk; thus, the use of aprepitant or fosaprepitant in addition to a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist and dexamethasone is recommended for antiemetic therapy. Further, hydration is required to prevent renal dysfunction, and the use of magnesium has been proposed as a part of the hydration procedure. When fosaprepitant is chosen for antiemetic therapy because the patient has dysphagia, and magnesium is added to the hydration procedure, there may be an incompatibility between the two drugs that reduces the antiemetic effect. In our hospital, in a former regimen, these two drugs were administered concurrently as premedication for regimens containing cisplatin. We varied the conditions so that in a revised regimen the two drugs did not come into contact due to pharmaceutical support, and we conducted a retrospective study to determine the difference in the antiemetic effect. The observation period was 2 years (from October 2015 to September 2017) for the former regimen group (n = 89) and 2 years (from October 2017 to September 2019) for the revised regimen group (n = 177). Comparison of the former and revised regimen groups revealed sex (p = 0.012); anticancer drug dosage (p = 0.006); and variation of premedication condition (p = 0.043) as factors affected by the revised regimen. Optimization of the premedication regimen was a form of necessary pharmaceutical support to maintain the patient's QOL.

Antiemetic Prophylaxis with Fosaprepitant and 5-HT3-Receptor Antagonists in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: High-dose myeloablative conditioning prior to autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHSCT) in pediatric patients is usually highly emetogenic. The antiemetic neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist fosaprepitant was safe and effective in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Data on fosaprepitant during autoHSCT in children are currently not available. METHODS: A total of 35 consecutive pediatric patients, who received an antiemetic prophylaxis with fosaprepitant (4 mg/kg; single dose, max. 1 x 150 mg/kg BW) and ondansetron (24-hours continuous infusion; 8-32 mg/24h) or granisetron (2 x 40 µg/kg∙d-1) during highly emetogenic conditioning chemotherapy before autoHSCT were retrospectively analyzed, and their results were compared with a control group comprising 35 consecutive pediatric patients, who received granisetron or ondansetron only. The antiemetic efficacy and the safety of the two prophylaxis regimens were compared with respect to three time periods after the first chemotherapy administration (0-24h, >24-120h, >120-240h). RESULTS: Clinical adverse events and clinically relevant increases/decreases of laboratory markers were similarly low and did not significantly differ between the two study groups (p>0.05). The registered number of vomiting events was significantly higher in the control group in the time periods of 0-24h (64 vs 22 events; p<0.01), >24-120h (135 vs 78 events; p<0.0001), >120-240h (268 vs 105 events; p<0.0001), and the whole observation period 0-240h (467 vs 205 events; p<0.0001). The percentage of patients experiencing vomiting was higher in the control group during the time period of >24-120h (100% vs 74.3%) but not the other analyzed time periods (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The fosaprepitant-based antiemetic prophylaxis was safe, well tolerated and significantly reduced vomiting in children undergoing highly emetogenic chemotherapy prior to autoHSCT. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to confirm these results.

High-flow oxygen and pro-serotonin agents for non-interventional treatment of post-dural-puncture headache.

OBJECTIVE: Post dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common complication in patients following diagnostic or therapeutic lumbar puncture, procedures requiring epidural access, and spinal surgery. Epidural blood patch (EBP), the gold standard for the treatment of this pathology requires training not provided to emergency physicians. In addition, the presence of concomitant pathology and abnormal laboratory values are contraindications to perform EBP. In presence of these limitations, we sought for a non-interventional management of PDPH utilizing high-flow oxygen and pro-serotonin agents. We reviewed the mechanism of action of this therapy METHODS: To illustrate our proposal, we report a series of twelve consecutive patients with PDPH treated with high-flow oxygen therapy at 12 L/min via a non-rebreathing mask and intravenous metoclopramide. RESULTS: All patients were treated with this conservative therapy, no adverse reactions were observed. After the intervention, the headache resolved without further indications for PDPH. CONCLUSION: Our series suggests that combining high-flow oxygen and pro-serotonin agents such metoclopramide in the ED might be a feasible option as effective as the invasive methods used in treating PDPH. This therapy appears to be efficient and to minimize risk, cost and side effects. It presents an easily accessible alternative that should be considered when PDPH is not a viable option.

Effect of Tropisetron on Prevention of Emergence Delirium in Patients After Noncardiac Surgery: A Trial Protocol.

Importance: Postoperative delirium is a frequent disorder for patients undergoing surgery and is associated with poor outcomes. Delirium may occur in the immediate period after anesthesia administration and surgery. Tropisetron, which is frequently administrated for postoperative nausea and vomiting, is also a partial agonist of α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors associated with neuroprotective effects. Tropisetron may be the potential pharmacological treatment to decrease delirium after noncardiac surgery. Objective: To perform a randomized clinical trial to determine the efficacy and safety of tropisetron for prevention of emergence delirium in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, 2-arm randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial will include 1508 patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. The intervention group will receive 5 mg of intravenous tropisetron before anesthesia induction, and patients in the control group will receive a placebo. The primary end point is the incidence of emergence delirium within 1 hour after tracheal tube removal, measured by the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit score. The main secondary outcome is the incidence of postoperative delirium measured at 3 days of follow-up. An intention-to-treat principle will be used for all analyses. Discussion: Delirium remains the most common neuropsychiatric complication for patients after surgery. This will be the first randomized clinical study to evaluate whether tropisetron is effective in preventing emergence delirium. Results from this study will provide evidence for alteration of daily practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04027751.

5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during moderately emetic chemotherapy for solid tumors: a multicenter, prospective, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30-90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. RESULTS: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26-84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51 and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5) + ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

Tropisetron But Not Granisetron Ameliorates Spatial Memory Impairment Induced by Chronic Cerebral Hypoperfusion.

Tropisetron and Granisetorn are 5-HT3 antagonists with antiemetic effects. Tropisetron also has a partial agonistic effect on alpha-7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (α7 nAChRs). On the other hand, chronic cerebral hypoperfusion (CCH) attenuates cerebral blood flow and impairs cognitive functions. The goal of this study was to investigate the effect of Tropisetron and Granisetron on CCH-induced spatial memory impairment in rats. Forty-eight male Wistar rats were used in this study. 2-VO surgery was done to induce CCH and Radial Eight Arm Maz apparatus was used to evaluate spatial memory (working and reference memory). Tropisetron was injected intraperitoneally at the doses of 1 and 5 mg/kg, and Granisetron was injected intraperitoneally at the dose of 3 mg/kg. Dorsal hippocampal (CA1) neurons count, Interleukin 6 (IL-6) serum level, and serotonin-reuptake transporter (SERT) gene expression were also evaluated. The results showed, CCH impaired working and reference memory, increased IL-6 serum level, and decreased CA1 neurons and SERT expression. Tropisetron at the dose of 5 mg/kg restored all the effects of CCH. However, Granisetron did not restore CCH-induced memory impairment. Furthermore, Granisetron had no effect on IL-6. While, it increased SERT expression and CA1 neurons. In conclusion, Tropisetron but not Granisetron, ameliorated spatial memory impairment induced by CCH. We suggested conducting more detailed studies investigating the role of serotonergic system (5-HT3 receptors and serotonin transporters) and also α7 nAChRs in the effects of Tropisetron.

Nausea and vomiting during post-transplantation cyclophosphamide administration.

Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is a new method to prevent graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Although the use of dexamethasone is recommended as prophylaxis against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) for patients who receive high-dose cyclophosphamide, corticosteroids cannot be used during PTCy administration to exploit depletion of alloreactive T cells. Thus, CINV may not be adequately controlled in this situation. We retrospectively examined antiemetic efficacy of the combination of a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA) and a NK1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA) in 36 patients who received PTCy, and compared this efficacy with that of the same combination together with dexamethasone in 27 patients conditioned with cyclophosphamide and total body irradiation (CY/TBI). The proportion of patients who had no vomiting during the acute phase of PTCy administration was 81%, and was lower than 100% in the CY/TBI group (p = 0.02). Our results suggest that prevention of CINV using 5-HT3 RA and NK1 RA during PTCy administration is suboptimal and that addition of antiemetic is necessary in patients who receive PTCy.

Pharmacogenetics of antiemetics for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

A substantial proportion of cancer patients experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) despite the use of antiemetic drugs. Prevalent genetic polymorphisms involved in antiemetic drug metabolism, drug transport and receptor pathways likely affect the effectiveness of antiemetics. Knowledge on which polymorphisms to integrate into individualised clinical care is needed. We did a systematic review evaluating the association between polymorphisms and effectiveness of antiemetics in cancer patients receiving moderately to highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Twenty studies n = 2331 evaluated eight polymorphisms in five candidate genes involved in 5-HT3 antagonist pathways. HTR3C C1214G increased the risk of acute chemotherapy-induced vomiting in the dominant model (odds ratio (OR) = 2.67, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.08-6.63). ABCB1 C3435T reduced the risk of acute CINV in the recessive model (OR = 0.60, 95 % CI: 0.44-0.81). Future studies should evaluate candidate genes that affect pharmacogenetics of other antiemetics beside 5-HT3 antagonists.