Bonjesta: nuevo tratamiento de las náuseas y vómitos del embarazo con liberación inmediata / Bonjesta: New Treatment for Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy with Immediate Release

Las náuseas y los vómitos en el embarazo son dos de los síntomas más frecuentes durante la gestación. Se estima que hasta el 85 % de las mujeres experimentan algún grado de náuseas con o sin vómitos durante la gestación. (AU)

Protection Versus Progress: The Challenge of Research on Cannabis Use During Pregnancy.

A central tension in pediatric research ethics arises from our desire to protect children from harm while also allowing progress toward discoveries that could improve child health. A prime example of this tension is research on a controversial yet increasingly common practice: the use of cannabis by women to treat nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. Studies of cannabis use in pregnancy face a combination of ethical hurdles because of the inclusion of pregnant women and involvement of a schedule I controlled substance. Given the growing need for research on the safety and efficacy of cannabis for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy, we reflect on the multiple historical contexts that have contributed to the challenge of studying cannabis use during pregnancy and make a case for the ethical rationale for such research.

[The interesting anti-H1 effects in maintenance insomnia: A reflection on the comparative advantages of doxylamine and doxepin]. / Les effets anti-H1 intéressants dans les insomnies de maintien : réflexion sur les intérêts comparés de la doxylamine et de la doxépine.

Doxylamine (Donormyl®, Lidene®, Generics) is commonly proposed by pharmacists as a sleeping pill which does not require a prescription. In France, today it is only prescribed for occasional insomnia in adults. In light of knowledge about the role of the histamine H1 inverse agonist drugs in the treatment of insomnia, and specifically the low dose doxepin (3 mg and 6 mg) marketed in the US and Canada (Silenor®), we suggest that the use of doxylamine may be appropriate for treating insomnia in the last third of the night. Better information to the pharmacist on the prescription of this anti-H1 hypnotic would be beneficial to the patient.

Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum.

Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) is a common condition that affects as many as 70% of pregnant women. Although no consensus definition is available for hyperemesis gravidarum (HG), it is typically viewed as the severe form of NVP and has been reported to occur in 0.3-10.8% of pregnant women. HG can be associated with poor maternal, fetal and child outcomes. The majority of women with NVP can be managed with dietary and lifestyle changes, but more than one-third of patients experience clinically relevant symptoms that may require fluid and vitamin supplementation and/or antiemetic therapy such as, for example, combined doxylamine/pyridoxine, which is not teratogenic and may be effective in treating NVP. Ondansetron is commonly used to treat HG, but studies are urgently needed to determine whether it is safer and more effective than using first-line antiemetics. Thiamine (vitamin B1) should be introduced following protocols to prevent refeeding syndrome and Wernicke encephalopathy. Recent advances in the genetic study of NVP and HG suggest a placental component to the aetiology by implicating common variants in genes encoding placental proteins (namely GDF15 and IGFBP7) and hormone receptors (namely GFRAL and PGR). New studies on aetiology, diagnosis, management and treatment are under way. In the next decade, progress in these areas may improve maternal quality of life and limit the adverse outcomes associated with HG.

New evidence for concern over the risk of birth defects from medications for nausea and vomitting of pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to quantify the risk of major congenital malformations (MCM) associated with first-trimester exposure to antiemetics. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Using the Quebec Pregnancy Cohort (1998-2015), first-trimester doxylamine-pyridoxine, metoclopramide, and ondansetron exposures were assessed for their association with MCM. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate odds ratios (OR), adjusting for potential confounders (aOR). RESULTS: Within 17 years of follow-up, the prevalence of antiemetic use during pregnancy increased by 76%. Within our cohort, 45,623 pregnancies were exposed to doxylamine-pyridoxine, 958 to metoclopramide, and 31 to ondansetron. Doxylamine-pyridoxine and metoclopramide use were associated with an increased risk of overall MCM (aOR 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.11; 3,945 exposed cases) and (aOR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.03-1.57; 105 exposed cases), respectively. Doxylamine-pyridoxine exposure was associated with increased risks of spina bifida (aOR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.11-3.14; 23 exposed cases), nervous system (aOR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.06-1.47; 225 exposed cases), and musculoskeletal system defects (aOR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.02-1.14; 1,735 exposed cases). Metoclopramide exposure was associated with an increased risk of genital organ defects (aOR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.14-4.48; 10 exposed cases). No statistically significant association was found between ondansetron exposure and the risk of overall MCM. CONCLUSION: First-trimester doxylamine-pyridoxine and metoclopramide exposure was associated with a significantly increased risk of overall and specific MCM.

Drug updates and approvals: 2018 in review.

In 2018, the FDA approved several new drugs for use in primary care. This article highlights the following new drugs: bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (Biktarvy); doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride (Bonjesta); erenumab-aooe (Aimovig); lofexidine hydrochloride (Lucemyra); tezacaftor and ivacaftor (Symdeko); and tildrakizumab-asmn (Ilumya).

[Doxylamine and melatonin in treatment of sleep disruption in gynecological practice]. / Doksilamin i melatonin v korrektsii narushenii sna v ginekologicheskoi praktike.

Symptoms of sleep disruption are widely prevalent in general population, but they are not necessarily form the full clinical presentation of insomnia. Diagnostic process should consider somatic diseases usually accompanied by sleep disruption. This review presents the data on insomnia symptoms in gynecological diseases: menstrual cycle related disorders, endometriosis, peri- and postmenopausal symptoms.

A Phase I Study of the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Intranasal Doxylamine in Subjects with Chronic Intermittent Sleep Impairment.

INTRODUCTION: Doxylamine tablets are approved as an over-the-counter sleep aid. We developed a doxylamine succinate intranasal metered-dose delivery system with the expectation of a more rapid onset of action with reduced side-effect potential compared with the oral tablet. METHODS: This phase I study randomized 24 adults with chronic intermittent sleep impairment to receive either single doses of intranasal doxylamine succinate 3.2, 6.3, or 12.7 mg or doxylamine succinate 25-mg oral tablet. Doxylamine pharmacokinetics were assessed using noncompartmental methods; pharmacodynamics were evaluated using the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and numerous psychomotor tests. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored. RESULTS: None of the intranasal dose levels produced a mean maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) above the 50 ng/mL target level or a time to maximum concentration shorter than that of the oral tablet. At the highest intranasal dose, Cmax and area under the doxylamine concentration-time curve were approximately 25% of the values achieved with the oral dose. Variation in most pharmacokinetic parameters was higher with intranasal compared with oral dosing. A relationship between plasma doxylamine concentration and KSS change from baseline was evident for the 25-mg tablet and, to a lesser extent, for the 12.7-mg intranasal dose. Changes from baseline in psychomotor parameters did not show a relationship to intranasal dose, and did not distinguish between intranasal versus oral dosing. The most common AEs with intranasal dosing were nasal congestion, nasal dryness, and frontal headache. CONCLUSION: The nasal spray did not increase doxylamine absorption or systemic bioavailability compared with the oral tablet.

[Effectiveness of reslip (doxylamine) in short-term insomnia: multicenter comparative randomized study]. / Éffektivnost' preparata reslip (doksilamin) pri ostroi insomnii: mnogotsentrovoe otkrytoe sravnitel'noe randomizirovannoe issledovanie.

AIM: Evaluate the efficiency of reslip (doxylamine) in short-term insomnia in comparison with donormyl in multicenter comparative randomized study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted in 6 medical centers and included 60 patients aged from 30 to 59 years with short-term insomnia. Patients were divided into two groups: in first one patients took reslip and in the second one donormyl in same dosage and regimen. RESULTS: The complete clinical remission of insomnia was achieved in majority of patients in both groups. Indicators of insomnia severity, sleep quality and daytime sleepiness in both groups improved with a high significance. Side effects were mild and in most cases did not result in treatment cessation. No significant differences between the groups in terms of clinical efficacy were found. CONCLUSION: Short-term doxylamine intake causes significant positive clinical effect in short-term insomnia with satisfactory acceptability by patients. Russian doxylamine Reslip correlates well with donormil regarding the clinical efficacy and acceptability and can be used in clinical practice for the short-term insomnia treatment.

Over-the-counter medications containing diphenhydramine and doxylamine used by older adults to improve sleep.

Background The unintentional misuse of over-the-counter sleep aids among older adults is an important public health problem and a focus of Healthy People 2020. Accordingly, the 2015 Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults recommends that individuals 65 years or older avoid use of diphenhydramine and doxylamine; however, many over-the-counter sleep products contain these active ingredients. Objective To identify the proportion of older adults using an over-the-counter medication containing diphenhydramine or doxylamine, and compare their characteristics with older adults using an over-the-counter medication that does not contain these ingredients. Setting Study participants were recruited from the Community Registry of the Pittsburgh Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center. Method The study sample was taken from a larger survey of 1025 participants on sleep health and over-the-counter sleep medication use conducted from February to April 2015. A subset of 169 participants aged 65 and older reporting taking at least one over-the-counter product to improve sleep within the past 30 days (16.5%) were selected for our analysis on associations between participant characteristics and potentially inappropriate use of over-the-counter sleep medications. Main outcome measure The proportion and characteristics of older adults taking at least one over-the-counter medication containing diphenhydramine or doxylamine. Results Of the 223 over-the-counter sleep medications listed by participants, 115 (52%) contained diphenhydramine or doxylamine. Using the Beers Criteria, we found that more than half of participants (59%) had used a potentially inappropriate over-the-counter medication containing diphenhydramine or doxylamine to improve sleep within the past 30 days. Participants taking at least one diphenhydramine or doxylamine containing medication were less likely to be aware of any safety risks in taking over-the-counter sleep medications than participants not taking these products (38 vs 49%, p = 0.016). Conclusion A majority of older adults in a limited sample from the United States taking an over-the-counter medication to improve sleep are taking a product containing diphenhydramine or doxylamine, both of which are classified as potentially inappropriate for older adults. Awareness of the safety risks of over-the-counter medications and addressing conditions that impact sleep quality could be facilitated through consultation with pharmacists and other healthcare providers.

8-Way Randomized Controlled Trial of Doxylamine, Pyridoxine and Dicyclomine for Nausea and Vomiting during Pregnancy: Restoration of Unpublished Information.

OBJECTIVES: We report information about an unpublished 1970s study ("8-way" Bendectin Study) that aimed to evaluate the relative therapeutic efficacy of doxylamine, pyridoxine, and dicyclomine in the management of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. We are publishing the trial's findings according to the restoring invisible and abandoned trials (RIAT) initiative because the trial was never published. DESIGN: Double blinded, multi-centred, randomized placebo-controlled study. SETTING: 14 clinics in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 2308 patients in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy with complaints of nausea or vomiting were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Each patient was randomized to one of eight arms: placebo, doxylamine/pyridoxine/dicylcomine, doxylamine/pyridoxine, dicylomine/pyridoxine, doxylamine, dicyclomine/pyridoxine, pyridoxine and dicyclomine. Each patient was instructed to take 2 tablets at bedtime and 1 additional tablet in the afternoon or morning if needed, for 7 nights. OUTCOMES: Reported outcomes included the number of hours of nausea reported by patients, the frequency of vomiting reported by patients and the overall efficacy of medication as judged by physicians. RESULTS: Data from 1599 (69% of those randomized) participants were analyzed. Based on the available summary data of physician evaluation of symptoms and ignoring missing data and data integrity issues, the proportion of participants who were "evaluated moderate or excellent" was greater in each of the seven active treatment groups when compared with placebo (57%): doxylamine/pyridoxine/dicylcomine (14% absolute difference versus placebo; 95% CI: 4 to 24), doxylamine/pyridoxine (21; 95% CI 11 to 30), dicylomine/pyridoxine (21; 95% CI 11 to 30), doxylamine (20; 95% CI 10 to 29), dicyclomine/pyridoxine (4; 95% CI -6 to 14), pyridoxine (9; 95% CI -1 to 19) and dicyclomine (4; 95% CI -6 to 14). Based on incomplete information, the most common adverse events were apparently drowsiness and fatigue. There is a high risk of bias in these previously unpublished results given the high attrition rate in a 7 day trial, the lack of prespecified outcomes or analyses, and the exclusion of some data because of questionable data integrity. CONCLUSION: The available information about this "8-way Bendectin" trial indicates it should not be used to support the efficacy of doxylamine, pyridoxine or dicyclomine for the treatment of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy because of a high risk of bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not registered.

Demonstration of early efficacy results of the delayed-release combination of doxylamine-pyridoxine for the treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) affects up to 80% of expecting mothers. In April 2013 the FDA approved the delayed-release combination of doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride (Diclegis®) for NVP, based in part, on the results of a phase III randomized trial demonstrating the efficacy of this drug combination [study drug marketed under the trade name Diclectin® in Canada and Diclegis® in the United States] compared to placebo in pregnant women. Study drug dosing occurred for 14 days, which is substantially longer than what has been performed in similar studies. The objective of this study was to evaluate, through secondary analysis, whether the primary measure of efficacy can be demonstrated after five days of treatment. METHODS: Women suffering from NVP were randomized to receive Diclegis® (n = 131) or placebo (n = 125) for 14 days at doses ranging from two to four tablets a day, based on a pre-specified titration protocol. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the validated Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis (PUQE) score at baseline versus Day 15 between Diclegis®-treated and placebo-treated women. For the present study, the change in PUQE score between baseline and Day 15 (end of the study) was compared to the changes observed for Days 3, 4, and 5. RESULTS: The use of delayed-release doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride tablets show improved NVP symptom control as compared to placebo on Days 3,4 and 5, with sustained efficacy until the end of the trial. CONCLUSION: A four day study drug dosing trial with Diclegis® is sufficient to document efficacy, as the results are similar to those achieved after 14 study drug dosing days. The benefit seen at the earlier time validates drug efficacy and minimizes the natural course of improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTR No. NCT006 14445 2007.

Treatments for Hyperemesis Gravidarum and Nausea and Vomiting in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Nausea and vomiting affects approximately 85% of pregnant women. The most severe form, hyperemesis gravidarum, affects up to 3% of women and can have significant adverse physical and psychological sequelae. Objective: To summarize current evidence on effective treatments for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum. Evidence Review: Databases were searched to June 8, 2016. Relevant websites and bibliographies were also searched. Titles and abstracts were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Results were narratively synthesized; planned meta-analysis was not possible because of heterogeneity and incomplete reporting of findings. Findings: Seventy-eight studies (n = 8930 participants) were included: 67 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 11 nonrandomized studies. Evidence from 35 RCTs at low risk of bias indicated that ginger, vitamin B6, antihistamines, metoclopramide (for mild symptoms), pyridoxine-doxylamine, and ondansetron (for moderate symptoms) were associated with improved symptoms compared with placebo. One RCT (n = 86) reported greater improvements in moderate symptoms following psychotherapy (change in Rhodes score [range, 0 {no symptoms} to 40 {worst possible symptoms}], 18.76 [SD, 5.48] to 7.06 [SD, 5.79] for intervention vs 19.18 [SD, 5.63] to 12.81 [SD, 6.88] for comparator [P < .001]). For moderate-severe symptoms, 1 RCT (n = 60) suggested that pyridoxine-doxylamine combination taken preemptively reduced risk of recurrence of moderate-severe symptoms compared with treatment once symptoms begin (15.4% vs 39.1% [P < .04]). One RCT (n = 83) found that ondansetron was associated with lower nausea scores on day 4 than metoclopramide (mean visual analog scale [VAS] score, 4.1 [SD, 2.9] for ondansetron vs 5.7 [SD, 2.3] for metoclopramide [P = .023]) but not episodes of emesis (5.0 [SD, 3.1] vs 3.3 [SD, 3], respectively [P = .013]). Although there was no difference in trend in nausea scores over the 14-day study period, trend in vomiting scores was better in the ondansetron group (P = .042). One RCT (n = 159) found no difference between metoclopramide and promethazine after 24 hours (episodes of vomiting, 1 [IQR, 0-5] for metoclopramide vs 2 [IQR, 0-3] for promethazine [P = .81], VAS [0-10 scale] for nausea, 2 [IQR, 1-5] vs 2 [IQR, 1-4], respectively [P = .99]). Three RCTs compared corticosteroids with placebo or promethazine or metoclopramide in women with severe symptoms. Improvements were seen in all corticosteroid groups, but only a significant difference between corticosteroids vs metoclopramide was reported (emesis reduction, 40.9% vs 16.5% at day 2; 71.6% vs 51.2% at day 3; 95.8% vs 76.6% at day 7 [n = 40, P < .001]). For other interventions, evidence was limited. Conclusions and Relevance: For mild symptoms of nausea and emesis of pregnancy, ginger, pyridoxine, antihistamines, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. For moderate symptoms, pyridoxine-doxylamine, promethazine, and metoclopramide were associated with greater benefit than placebo. Ondansetron was associated with improvement for a range of symptom severity. Corticosteroids may be associated with benefit in severe cases. Overall the quality of evidence was low.