Risk Factors for Adverse Events in Patients with Chronic Constipation Following Lubiprostone Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Lubiprostone is an effective treatment of chronic constipation (CC). However, as with other stimulant or osmotic laxatives, adverse events (AEs) can make it difficult to continue treatment. This article investigates AE risk factors associated with lubiprostone. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all 1,338 Japanese patients with CC treated at our hospital from October 2013 to July 2017. All patients were diagnosed with constipation as defined by the Roma III criteria. Enrolled patients received lubiprostone orally (24 or 48 µg daily), after which we investigated the incidence of AEs. The causative factors for diarrhea and nausea, the most common AEs, were examined by the backward logistic regression model. RESULTS: Two hundred eight (15.5%) experienced at least 1 AE. No serious AEs were associated with the study drug. The AEs reported by >1% of patients overall were diarrhea (6.1%) and nausea (4.2%). We performed a multivariate logistic regression using a backward variable selection method to investigate AE risk factors. Factors associated with higher incidence of diarrhea were patient age of 65 years or more (odds ratio: [95% confidence interval]; p value) (2.09: [1.05-4.16]; 0.035). Factors associated with greater likelihood of nausea included female gender (1.99: [1.10-3.61]; 0.023), and the chief complaint was a patient complaining of abdominal pain and fullness (2.07: [1.01-4.22]; 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding AE risk factors can help avoid unnecessary AEs and promote more effective treatment.

The Efficacy and Safety of Lubiprostone for Constipation in Cancer Patients Compared with Non-cancer Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Lubiprostone is an effective drug for various types of constipation in patients without cancer; however, there is no report on its efficacy and safety in patients with cancer. Our purpose was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lubiprostone for constipation in cancer patients. We retrospectively studied 124 patients (cancer, N = 67) who were treated with lubiprostone for constipation in our hospital between June 2013 and May 2016. The number of bowel movements (BMs) increased in the both the cancer and non-cancer groups. The mean change in BM frequency did not differ between the two groups. Approximately 70% of patients in both groups had an initial BM within 24 h after administration of lubiprostone. The most common lubiprostone-related adverse events in both groups were diarrhea (38.8 vs. 14%), and nausea (22.4 vs. 8.8%). No lubiprostone-related serious adverse events occurred. Discontinuation due to the side effects of lubiprostone was more frequent in cancer patients (p = 0.023). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of discontinuation of lubiprostone in cancer patients was high in patients with a body-mass index (BMI) <22, and low in patients using opioids and magnesium oxide dosage ≥1000 mg/d. Our study showed that while lubiprostone was as effective in cancer patients as in non-cancer patients, in cancer patients it was associated with a high incidence of diarrhea and nausea side effects and warranted caution, especially in patients with a low BMI.

Lubiprostone in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a trial.

BACKGROUND: The laxative drug lubiprostone improves intestinal permeability in healthy volunteers. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of lubiprostone in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) with constipation via attenuation of intestinal permeability. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a study in Yokohama City University Hospital, Japan, recruited patients (aged 20-85 years) with NAFLD and constipation, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) at least 40 U/L, liver stiffness (≤6·7 kPa), and hepatic fat fraction at least 5·2% when assessed by MRI-proton density fat fraction. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (11:10:9) by a computer-based system and stratified by age and sex to receive 24 µg lubiprostone, 12 µg lubiprostone, or placebo, orally, once per day for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the absolute changes in ALT at 12 weeks. Efficacy analysis was done by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. This trial was registered with University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000026635). FINDINGS: Between March 24, 2017, and April 3, 2018, we screened 288 patients, of whom 150 (52%) were randomly assigned to treatment: 55 patients were assigned to receive 24 µg lubiprostone, 50 to receive 12 µg lubiprostone, and 45 to receive placebo. A greater decrease in the absolute ALT levels from baseline to 12 weeks was seen in the 24 µg lubiprostone group (mean -13 U/L [SD 19]) than in the placebo group (1 U/L [24]; mean difference -15 U/L [95% CI -23 to -6], p=0·0007) and in the 12 µg lubiprostone group (-12 U/L [21]) than in the placebo group (mean difference -13 U/L [-22 to -5], p=0·0023). 18 (33%) of 55 patients in the 24 µg group had at least one adverse event, as did three (6%) of 47 patients in the 12 µg group and three (7%) of 43 in the placebo group. The most common adverse event was diarrhoea (17 [31%] of patients in the 24 µg group, three [6%] in the 12 µg group, none in the placebo group). No life-threatening events or treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Lubiprostone was well tolerated and reduced the levels of liver enzymes in patients with NAFLD and constipation. Further studies are necessary to better define the efficacy and tolerability of lubiprostone in patients with NAFLD without constipation. FUNDING: Mylan EPD G.K.

Evaluating When and Why Patients Discontinue Chronic Therapy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation and Chronic Idiopathic Constipation.

INTRODUCTION: To inform the patient-centered discussion regarding comparative outcomes with irritable bowel syndrome/chronic idiopathic constipation pharmacotherapy, we evaluated reasons and timing of discontinuation of FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation in a large observational real-world cohort. METHODS: We identified patients initiating lubiprostone or linaclotide within the University of Michigan Electronic Medical Record (2012-2016). Medication start and stop dates were determined in manual chart review including detailed review of all documentation including office notes and telephone encounters. A Cox model was constructed to predict the hazard of discontinuation. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis of 1,612 patients, linaclotide users had a lower risk of discontinuing therapy than lubiprostone users for any reason (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5-0.8). At 3 and 12 months, the overall discontinuation rates were 23% and 43% for lubiprostone compared with 14% and 24% for linaclotide. Over the first year of therapy, more than half of discontinuations due to intolerance occurred in the first 3 months for both drugs. Linaclotide users were more likely to discontinue due to intolerance (HR = 1.6 [95% CI, 1.2-2.3]) but less likely to discontinue due to insufficient efficacy of therapy (HR = 0.5 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8]). IBS diagnosis increased the hazard of discontinuation of lubiprostone relative to linactolide (HR = 1.4, 95% CI, 1.1-1.6). Loss of prescription drug coverage remained a common reason for discontinuation over the first year of therapy. DISCUSSION: Individuals appear more likely to discontinue lubiprostone than linaclotide overall, but more likely to discontinue linaclotide compared with lubiprostone due to intolerance (mostly diarrhea). Most discontinuations due to intolerance occur in the first 3 months. These results may be useful in individualized treatment selection and enhancing patient knowledge regarding long-term outcomes.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the addition of lubiprostone to bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

AIM: Adequate bowel preparation is essential to the quality of colonoscopy. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of the addition of lubiprostone to the bowel preparation process prior to colonoscopy. METHODS: Online databases, namely, PubMed, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library, were searched for randomized controlled trials that assessed the additive effect of lubiprostone on the quality of colon preparation in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Each included study was evaluated by the Jadad score to assess the quality of the study. The primary outcome was bowel preparation efficacy, defined as the proportion of patients with an excellent or poor preparation. The secondary outcomes included the length of the colonoscopy, polyp detection, and any adverse effects. RESULTS: In total, 5 articles published between 2008 and 2016 fulfilled the selection criteria. The addition of lubiprostone to the bowel cleansing process significantly increased the proportion of patients with an excellent preparation (risk ratio [RR] = 1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.40-2.02, P < .00001) but did not decrease the procedural time or increase the polyp detection rate (mean difference = -0.52, 95% CI: -3.74-2.69, P = .75; RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.96-1.42, P = .13, respectively). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with any adverse events. CONCLUSION: The addition of lubiprostone to the bowel preparation regimen prior to colonoscopy is effective and safe.

Response to lubiprostone in chronic constipation is associated with increased mucus and mucin output: a randomized clinical trial.

.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lubiprostone for the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in adult patients with constipation: The LUBIPRONE, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study design.

BACKGROUND: This paper reports the protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to test the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lubiprostone (LUB) vs. placebo on suppressing gut permeability in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients with constipation. NAFLD, including non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), is a common chronic liver disorder. Progression is associated with increased gut permeability and gut-derived endotoxins. Most NAFLD/NASH clinical trial drugs aim to improve liver function or systemic metabolism. LUB is a type 2 chloride channel activator used as a laxative for the treatment of patients with constipation. LUB suppresses gut permeability induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in healthy volunteers and lowers blood endotoxin levels. There have been no clinical studies of LUB for NAFLD/NASH patients. METHODS: The study plans to enrol adult patients (20-85 years, planned enrolment, n = 150; planned sample size, n = 120) with NAFLD and constipation, alanine aminotransferase ≥40 IU/L, equivalent steatosis grade ≥1, and equivalent fibrosis stage <4 measured using non-invasive vibration-controlled transient elastography and magnetic resonance imaging. Participants will be randomly allocated into three groups: LUB 12 µg, LUB 24 µg, and a placebo group. RESULTS: The primary endpoint will be changes in alanine aminotransferase from baseline at 12 weeks. The main secondary endpoint will be changes in intestinal permeability from baseline at 12 weeks using the lactulose mannitol ratio. CONCLUSIONS: This study will determine whether LUB improves gut permeability in NAFLD patients with constipation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000026635).

Impact of lubiprostone on gastric-emptying profile and the possible effect of concomitant domperidone in healthy adults
.

BACKGROUND: Lubiprostone is effective for patients with chronic constipation. This agent sometimes causes upper gastrointestinal symptoms, such as nausea, which is one of the chief reasons for discontinuation. However, the etiology of and strategy against bothersome gastrointestinal symptoms of lubiprostone remain unclear. AIMS: The goal of this study was to investigate the influence of lubiprostone on the gastric-emptying profile of healthy adults. The effect of domperidone on gastric emptying and gastrointestinal symptoms after lubiprostone administration were also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 80 healthy male participants underwent 13C acetate breath testing to evaluate gastric emptying. The test meal comprised 200 kcal of a standard liquid nutrient. Each participant underwent 3 random breath tests with: 1) no premedication; 2) 24 µg of lubiprostone 30 minutes prior to the study; and 3) 24 µg of lubiprostone plus 10 mg of domperidone 30 minutes prior to the study. Gastrointestinal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, epigastric pain, fullness, distress feeling) during testing were evaluated using a 7-point scoring system. RESULTS: Gastric emptying was significantly delayed by the administration of lubiprostone. Among all 8 subjects, 4 reported heartburn after taking lubiprostone, whereas this symptom was not found when subjects received concomitant domperidone. However, gastric emptying showed little change between lubiprostone alone and lubiprostone plus domperidone. CONCLUSION: Lubiprostone delayed gastric emptying of liquid in healthy adults, which could be associated with the gastrointestinal symptoms caused by the agent. Domperidone seemed effective against such gastrointestinal symptoms after administration of lubiprostone. This effect seemed unrelated to gastric motility.
.

Addition of Lubiprostone to polyethylene glycol(PEG) enhances the quality & efficacy of colonoscopy preparation: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is an essential prerequisite for complete mucosal visualization during colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions are commonly used. However the large volume of the solution is often poorly tolerated. Addition of Lubiprostone (LB) could improve the adequacy of standard PEG preparation & reduce requirement. The aims to assess adequacy of PEG preparation with addition of single dose LB (24mcg) vs placebo and efficacy of reduced dose PEG + LB compared with full dose PEG + LB. METHODS: Single center prospective double blind randomized controlled trial. Part I: 442 patients for colonoscopy randomized to receive placebo (GrA) or single dose of LB (GrB) prior to PEG preparation. Quality of bowel preparation graded 0-9 according to Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). BBPS-9: excellent and BBPS 0-4: repeat procedure. Part II: 146 patients randomized to receive LB + 1.5 L PEG (GrC; 75) or LB + 1 L PEG (GrD; 71). BBPS score compared with GrB (2 L PEG). RESULTS: Part I: 442 patients (221 GrA & 221 Gr B). LB resulted in significant improvement in total BBPS (7.44 + 0.14 vs. 6.36 + 0.16, p < 0.0001). 66.5 % Gr B vs 38 % Gr A had excellent prep; 42.5 % GrB vs 24 % GrA had adequate prep. Repeat procedure needed 9.5 % Gr B vs 16.7 % Gr A (P < 0.01). Part II: No difference in BBPS scores with lower doses (Gr C&D) compared to standard (GrB) (Mean BBPS 7.44 + 0.14 GrA,7.30 + 0.25 GrC;7.25 + 0.26 GrD;p >0.05). CONCLUSION: Single dose LB prior to PEG significantly enhanced bowel preparation compared to PEG alone. There was no significant difference in quality of preparation with lower doses of PEG when combined with LB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was approved by institutional review board and the trial was registered on March 22, 2011 with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01324284 ).

Lubiprostone Accelerates Intestinal Transit and Alleviates Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth in Patients With Chronic Constipation.

BACKGROUND: Lubiprostone is an effective treatment for chronic constipation (CC). The mechanism of action of lubiprostone is through increasing fluid secretion and lubrication of the intestinal lumen. The effects of lubiprostone on gastrointestinal transit and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) have not been adequately explored. The current study was designed to investigate whether lubiprostone (1) alters gastrointestinal transit and (2) affects SIBO in patients with constipation. METHODS: A total of 29 female patients (mean age = 39 years; range: 19-64) with CC received 2 weeks of lubiprostone (24mcg b.i.d., P.O.). Stool consistency based on Bristol stool scale and the frequency of bowel movements (BMs) were recorded. Gastric emptying time, small bowel transit time, colon transit time (CTT), combined small and large bowel transit time (SLBTT) and whole gut transit time were measured using wireless motility capsule. The SIBO status was assessed by the lactulose breath test. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank, Mann-Whitney U, Spearman׳s rank correlation and Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Lubiprostone significantly softened the stool and increased the frequency of BM from median of 2 to 4times per week. The CTT and SLBTT were significantly shorter in responders to lubiprostone (i.e., those with ≥ 2 times increase in the number of their weekly BM) compared with nonresponders. The higher frequency of BM after treatment was significantly correlated with the acceleration of CTT, SLBTT and whole gut transit time. In all, 17 out of 25 (68%) patients, who were tested for SIBO at baseline, were positive. In addition, 7 out of 17 (41%) SIBO-positive patients became SIBO-negative after lubiprostone treatment (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In CC, lubiprostone improves the frequency of BMs, softens the stool, accelerates intestinal transit and decreases accompanying SIBO. The improvement of SIBO could be explained by the cleansing effect of increased intestinal fluid and mucus combined with enhanced intestinal motility with lubiprostone.

Novel Oral Therapies for Opioid-induced Bowel Dysfunction in Patients with Chronic Noncancer Pain.

Opioid analgesics are frequently prescribed and play an important role in chronic pain management. Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction, which includes constipation, hardened stool, incomplete evacuation, gas, and nausea and vomiting, is the most common adverse event associated with opioid use. Mu-opioid receptors are specifically responsible for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction, resulting in reduced peristaltic and secretory actions. Agents that reverse these actions in the bowel without reversing pain control in the central nervous system may be preferred over traditional laxatives. The efficacy and safety of these agents in chronic noncancer pain were assessed from publications identified through Ovid and PubMed database searches. Trials that evaluated the safety and efficacy of oral agents for opioid-induced constipation or opioid-induced bowel dysfunction, excluding laxatives, were reviewed. Lubiprostone and naloxegol are approved in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration for use in opioid-induced constipation. Axelopran (TD-1211) and sustained-release naloxone have undergone phase 2 and phase 1 studies, respectively, for the same indication. Naloxegol and axelopran are peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists. Naloxone essentially functions as a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist when administered orally in a sustained-release formulation. Lubiprostone is a locally acting chloride channel (CIC-2) activator that increases secretions and peristalsis. All agents increase spontaneous bowel movements and reduce other bowel symptoms compared with placebo in patients with noncancer pain who are chronic opioid users. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal in nature, and none of the drugs were associated with severe adverse or cardiovascular events. Investigations comparing these agents to regimens using standard laxative and combination therapy and trials in special populations and patients with active cancer are needed to further define their role in therapy.

Lubiprostone increases spontaneous bowel movement frequency and quality of life in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Lubiprostone is an activator of the type 2 chloride channel that facilitates spontaneous bowel movement (SBM). We performed phase 3 studies to determine whether lubiprostone increases the frequency of SBM in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in Japan, and whether long-term administration of lubiprostone increases the quality of life of patients with CIC. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of lubiprostone. Patients with CIC (n = 124) were assigned randomly to groups given placebo (n = 62) or lubiprostone (48 µg/day; n = 62) for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the change from baseline in the weekly average number of SBMs after 1 week of administration. In a long-term study of efficacy and safety, 209 patients with CIC were given lubiprostone (24 µg twice daily) for 48 weeks. RESULTS: Daily administration of lubiprostone induced a significantly greater change, from baseline, in the weekly average number of SBMs at week 1 (increase of 3.7 ± 2.8), compared with placebo (increase of 1.3 ± 1.8; P < .001). The frequency of SBMs during each week of the study period was significantly higher after subjects began receiving lubiprostone than at baseline (P < .0001 at all weeks). Long-term administration of lubiprostone significantly increased scores from the Short-Form health survey and irritable bowel syndrome quality-of-life questionnaire, compared with baseline. We did not observe any severe adverse reactions to lubiprostone. CONCLUSIONS: In phase 3 studies in Japan, lubiprostone increased the weekly average number of SBMs and increased the quality of life of patients with CIC. Clinical Trial Notification of the Japanese Regulatory Authorities: 20-3296 and 20-3300.

Lubiprostone plus PEG electrolytes versus placebo plus PEG electrolytes for outpatient colonoscopy preparation: a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Bowel preparation using large volume of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions is often poorly tolerated. Therefore, there are ongoing efforts to develop an alternative bowel cleansing regimen that should be equally effective and better tolerated. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of lubiprostone (versus placebo) plus PEG as a bowel cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. Our study was a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled design. Patients scheduled for screening colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to lubiprostone (group 1) or placebo (group 2) plus 1 gallon of PEG. The primary endpoints were patient's tolerability and endoscopist's evaluation of the preparation quality. The secondary endpoint was to determine any reduction in the amount of PEG consumed in the lubiprostone group compared with the placebo group. One hundred twenty-three patients completed the study and were included in the analysis. There was no difference in overall cleanliness. The volume of PEG was similar in both the groups. The volume of PEG approached significance as a predictor of improved score for both the groups (P = 0.054). Lubiprostone plus PEG was similar to placebo plus PEG in colon cleansing and volume of PEG consumed. The volume of PEG consumed showed a trend toward improving the quality of the colon cleansing.