Effects of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists on cisplatin-induced kidney injury.

Nausea, vomiting, and renal injury are the common adverse effects associated with cisplatin. Cisplatin is excreted via the multidrug and toxin release (MATE) transporter, and the involvement of the MATE transporter in cisplatin-induced kidney injury has been reported. The MATE transporter is also involved in the excretion of ondansetron, but the effects of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists used clinically for cisplatin-induced renal injury have not been elucidated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in a mouse model of cisplatin-induced kidney injury and to validate the results using medical big data analysis of more than 1.4 million reports and a survey of 3000 hospital medical records. The concomitant use of a first-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (ondansetron, granisetron, or ramosetron) significantly increased cisplatin accumulation in the kidneys and worsened renal damage. Conversely, the concomitant use of palonosetron had no effect on renal function compared with the use of cisplatin alone. Furthermore, an analysis of data from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System and retrospective medical records revealed that the combination treatment of cisplatin and a first-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist significantly increased the number of reported renal adverse events compared with the combination treatment of cisplatin and a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. These results suggest that compared with the first-generation antagonists, second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists do not worsen cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. The findings should be validated in a prospective controlled trial before implementation in clinical practice.

Effects of Palonosetron on Nausea and Vomiting Induced by Multiple-Day Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Study.

Patients who undergo multiple-day chemotherapy sessions experience hard-to-treat nausea and vomiting. Currently, there is no effective standard treatment for this condition. This study compared the preventive effect of first-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3 RAs) and second-generation 5-HT3 RAs palonosetron in multiple-day chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The design of this study was a retrospective case-control study of patients who received a five-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy and were treated with aprepitant, dexamethasone, granisetron, and ramosetron or palonosetron. The patients were divided into two groups: patients given granisetron and ramosetron (the first-generation group), and those given palonosetron (palonosetron group). The percentage of patients with a complete response or total control was assessed. They were divided into three phases: 0-216 h (overall phase), 0-120 h (remedial phase), and 120-216 h (after phase). The remedial phase was further divided into 0-24 h (early phase) and 24-120 h (later phase). Moreover, the nutritional status of each patient was assessed by noting the patients' total calorie-intake per day and total parenteral nutrition. First-generation 5-HT3 RAs and palonosetron were used for treatment in 18 and 28 patients, respectively. The complete response rate and caloric oral intake of the later phase were higher in the palonosetron group than in the first-generation group. We conclude that palonosetron treatment was more effective than first-generation 5-HT3 RAs in controlling multiple-day chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Pharmacological control of pain during propofol injection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: A research was performed to review the effect of pharmacological interventions to control the propofol injection pain. METHODS: A search of databases was performed. Randomized clinical trials comparing pharmacological interventions with placebo or active compound to reduce of propofol injection pain were selected. The outcome was the frequency of pain. Data were analyzed in three subgroups according to type of control. Random effect model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Fifty-two articles with 105 studies on 7315 adults were included. The incidence of pain in intervention and control group was 40.91% and 66.27%. Combination therapy with two drugs (RR = 0.29 95% CI = (0.11, 0.75)), opioids (RR = 0.39 95% CI = (0.28, 0.54)) and 5 HT3 antagonists (RR = 0.39 95% CI = (0.30, 0.50)) were the most effective interventions compared to placebo. Combination therapy was the most effective intervention compared to lidocaine as control (RR = 0.51 95% CI = (0.46, 0.55)). Opioids were the most effective intervention compared to long chain triglyceride propofol as control (RR = 0.27 95% CI = (0.15, 0.49)). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with two different drugs, opioids and surprisingly 5 HT3 antagonists were the most effective interventions compared to placebo. Combination therapy was the most effective versus lidocaine as control.

Granisetron, a selective 5-HT3 antagonist, reduces L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine-induced abnormal involuntary movements in the 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned rat.

Administration of L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) provides Parkinson's disease patients with effective symptomatic relief. However, long-term L-DOPA therapy is often marred by complications such as dyskinesia. We have previously demonstrated that serotonin type 3 (5-HT3) receptor blockade with the clinically available and highly selective antagonist ondansetron alleviates dyskinesia in the 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA)-lesioned rat. Here, we sought to explore the antidyskinetic efficacy of granisetron, another clinically available 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. Rats were rendered hemi-parkinsonian by 6-OHDA injection in the medial forebrain bundle. Following induction of stable abnormal involuntary movements (AIMs), granisetron (0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1 and 1 mg/kg) or vehicle was acutely administered in combination with L-DOPA and the severity of AIMs, both duration and amplitude, was determined. We also assessed the effect of granisetron on L-DOPA antiparkinsonian action by performing the cylinder test. Adding granisetron (0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1 and 1 mg/kg) to L-DOPA resulted in a significant reduction of AIMs duration and amplitude, with certain parameters being reduced by as much as 38 and 45% (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). The antidyskinetic effect of granisetron was not accompanied by a reduction of L-DOPA antiparkinsonian action. These results suggest that 5-HT3 blockade may reduce L-DOPA-induced dyskinesia without impairing the therapeutic efficacy of L-DOPA. However, a U-shaped dose-response curve obtained with certain parameters may limit the therapeutic potential of this strategy and require further investigation.

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.

NEPA as antiemetic prophylaxis after failure of 5HT3-RA plus dexamethasone in patients receiving carboplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy: A monocentric real-life experience.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) may affect adherence to planned chemotherapy treatments and compromise patients' quality of life during the therapy. NEPA is an oral fixed combination of netupitant, a highly-selective NK1-RA and palonosetron, a 5HT3-RA, approved for the prevention of acute and delayed CINV. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NEPA with dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis in the challenging setting of carboplatin and gemcitabine combination chemotherapy, after failure of prophylaxis with 5HT3 receptor antagonist. METHODS: Eligible patients were undergoing carboplatin and gemcitabine combination chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ovarian cancer or urothelial cancer and experienced nausea and/or vomiting after the first cycle of chemotherapy, despite an antiemetic prophylaxis with a 5HT3-RA and dexamethasone. Primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (CR: no emesis, no rescue medication) obtained with NEPA, during the overall phase (0-120 h), after the start of chemotherapy. RESULTS: During the first cycle of chemotherapy, 15 out of 30 (50%) patients did not properly control CINV with a 5HT3-RA plus dexamethasone used as primary antiemetic prophylaxis and then were switched to NEPA from the subsequent cycle. During NEPA administration, 13 out of 15 patients (86.7%) achieved an overall CR (no emesis, no rescue medication). Antiemetic treatment with NEPA was very well tolerated with only two patients (13.3%) that experienced a grade 1 TEAE. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience showed that NEPA has proven to be very effective and well tolerated in the prophylaxis of CINV induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

What is the ideal combination antiemetic regimen?

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) are frequent unpleasant complaints that patients and clinicians report after surgery. PONV and PDNV have been associated with postoperative complications and hospital discharge delays. Despite the extensive evidence describing the use of several regimens in different surgical populations, the ideal regimen has not been established. Several antiemetic drugs have been evaluated in more than 1000 clinical controlled trials for management of this complex emetogenic pathway, including the 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor antagonists, neurokinin-type receptor antagonists, antihistaminics, anticholinergics, and corticosteroids, with the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists being the most commonly used for PONV prophylaxis. Because of the complex emetogenic pathway and multifactorial etiology of PONV, a multimodal approach using two or more drugs that act at different neuro-receptor sites is suggested in patients with one or more risk factors to successfully address PONV and reduce its incidence. Nevertheless, the most studied regimens in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the combination of serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonists with dexamethasone or dopamine receptor antagonists (droperidol). Therefore, the safest and more effective combination regimen appears to be the use of serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonist antiemetic drugs with dexamethasone.

Is there a place for genetics in the management of PONV?

Antiemetic prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) - a frequent complication in the postoperative period - is routinely given to high-risk patients. However, standard PONV risk models do not account for genetic factors, which have been shown to have a significant influence on PONV incidence and drug response. In this review, we describe the polymorphisms of various genes (serotonin, dopamine, cholinergic, etc.) and how pharmacogenomics is involved in the pathophysiology of PONV. This review also addresses how genetics is involved in today's clinical practice related to PONV and how it will change in the upcoming years as personalized medicine advances.

The optimum management of nausea and vomiting during and after cesarean delivery.

Intraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV and PONV) afflict up to 80% of parturients undergoing cesarean delivery with neuraxial anesthesia. Preventing nausea and emesis is a top priority for women undergoing cesarean delivery and is included in the quality of recovery measures and enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery protocols. The majority of known perioperative emetic triggers can be avoided or mitigated by optimizing anesthetic and surgical management. IONV may arise from spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension, intraoperative pain, and medications such as uterotonics and antibiotics. Furthermore, uterine exteriorization and peritoneal irrigation increase IONV risk. Conversely, preventing PONV mainly focuses on optimizing analgesia through an opioid-sparing, multimodal strategy. In addition, combination prophylactic antiemetic therapy should be instituted in this high-risk population to further reduce the risk of IONV and PONV.

The next generation of antiemetics for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) afflict approximately 30% of patients overall and up to 80% of high-risk patients after surgery. Optimal pharmacological prophylaxis of PONV is challenging as it necessitates the consideration of PONV risk, drug efficacy, and potential adverse effects. Despite significant advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology and risk factors of PONV, its incidence has remained largely unchanged. Newer antiemetics have been introduced that may have improved safety profiles, longer duration of action, and better efficacy. This review aims to summarize the recent developments pertaining to these new agents and their potential application toward the management of PONV.

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.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists for postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis / Antagonistas do receptor da neurocinina-1 no tratamento de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório: Revisão sistemática e meta-análise

Abstract Background: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of general anesthesia. Several kinds of antiemetics, including 5-Hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, and Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists have been used to treat PONV. Objectives: To compare the antiemetic effect of NK-1 receptor antagonists, including fosaprepitant. Data sources: Online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library databases) were used. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) performed in patients over 18 years with ASA-PS of I‒III, aimed to assess the efficacy of antiemetics including NK-1 receptor antagonists and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, and compared the incidence of PONV were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: All statistical assessments were conducted by a random effect approach, and odds ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated. Results: Aprepitant 40 mg and 80 mg significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting 0‒24 hours postoperatively (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.40]; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI 0.30‒0.54]; p < 0.001, and OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19‒0.56; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant could also reduce the incidence of vomiting significantly both 0‒24 and 0‒48 hours postoperatively (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.24; p < 0.001 and OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02‒0.23; p < 0.001). Limitations: Risk factors for PONV are not considered, RCTs using multiple antiemetics are included, RCTs for fosaprepitant is small, and some bias may be present. Conclusions and implications of key findings: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant can be effective prophylactic antiemetics for postoperative vomiting. However, more studies are required for higher-quality meta-analyses. Systematic review registration number: CRD42019120188.

Resumo Histórico: Náusea e Vômito no Pós-Operatório (NVPO) é um evento adverso frequente da anestesia geral. Várias classes de antieméticos, incluindo antagonistas do receptor 5-Hidroxitriptamina3 (5-HT3) e antagonistas do receptor da Neurocinina-1 (NK-1), têm sido utilizados para tratar a NVPO. Objetivo: Comparar o efeito antiemético dos antagonistas do receptor NK-1, incluindo o fosaprepitanto. Fontes de dados: Foram utilizadas bases de dados on-line (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library). Critérios de elegibilidade do estudo, participantes e intervenções: Foram incluídos Estudos Clínicos Randomizados (ECR) realizados em pacientes acima de 18 anos classificação ASA I a III, com o objetivo de avaliar a eficácia de antieméticos que incluíssem antagonistas do receptor NK-1 e antagonistas do receptor 5-HT3, e que comparassem a incidência de NVPO. Métodos de avaliação e síntese do estudo: Todas as avaliações estatísticas foram realizadas por abordagem de efeito aleatório e foram calculadas razões de chances e Intervalos de Confiança de 95%. Resultados: As doses de 40 mg e 80 mg de aprepitanto reduziram significantemente a incidência de vômito no período de 0 a 24 horas pós-operatórias (razão de chances [OR = 0,40]; Intervalo de Confiança de 95% [95% IC] 0,30-0,54; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,32; 95% IC 0,19-0,56; p < 0,001). O fosaprepitanto pode também reduzir significantemente a incidência de vômito tanto de 0-24 horas como no período de 0-48 horas pós-operatórias (OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,24; p < 0,001 e OR = 0,07; 95% IC 0,02-0,23; p < 0,001). Limitações: Os fatores de risco para NVPO não foram analisados, ECRs usando múltiplos antieméticos foram incluídos, ECRs para fosaprepitanto tinham amostras pequenas, podendo haver algum viés. Conclusões e implicações dos principais achados: Aprepitanto e fosaprepitanto podem ser drogas antieméticas profiláticas efetivas para vômito no pós-operatório. No entanto, são necessários mais estudos para elaboração de meta-análises de melhor qualidade. Número de registro da revisão sistemática: CRD42019120188.

5-HT3 blockade does not attenuate postspinal blood pressure change in cesarean section: A case-control study.

Spinal anesthesia (SpA) for elective caesarean section (CS) is often accompanied by clinically relevant arterial hypotension. The Bezold-Jarisch reflex, causing postspinal hypotension, has been shown to be antagonized by serotonin type 3 (5-HT3) blockade. Our aim was to assess if routine prophylactic administration of the 5-HT3 antagonist ondansetron (ODS) attenuates postspinal change in maternal blood pressure.Elective CS under SpA were retrospectively analyzed. Eighty parturients having routinely received 8 mg ODS prior to SpA were compared with 80 patients having not (control group).Mean arterial blood pressure significantly decreased from baseline to the postspinal period (P < .0001) without differences in blood pressure decreases between the 2 groups. This also applied to the heart rate. Overall use of cafedrine/theodrenaline was higher in the ODS group (0.8 (0.4-1.6) mL vs 0.8 (0-1.0) mL in the control group, P = .01). APGAR values showed a presumably clinically irrelevant decrease in control group compared with the ODS group.Our results suggest that routine administration of ODS in a dosage of 8 mg does not effectively attenuate postspinal change in maternal blood pressure during CS in our setting. Given the wide variability of anesthetic techniques, only large prospective and randomized multicenter trials will ultimately serve to elucidate this issue.

Management of cisplatin-associated toxicities in bladder cancer patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cisplatin remains the treatment cornerstone for bladder cancer, either in neoadjuvant or in metastatic (cisplatin-gemcitabine or dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin). Timely and adequate management of cisplatin's adverse events is important in order to avoid dose reductions, treatment delays, or cessation. Over the last years, several randomized studies and updated guidelines have been published on this subject. RECENT FINDINGS: The incidence, physiopathology, risk factors, preventive treatment, and optimal management of such complications will be presented, with special focus on cisplatin-associated nausea and vomiting, acute kidney injury (AKI), hypomagnesemia, neurotoxicity, and ototoxicity. SUMMARY: Optimal prevention of cisplatin-associated nausea and vomiting requires an aggressive approach with the use of a four-drug prophylactic regimen (NK1 receptor antagonist, 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, olanzapine). The use of intensive hydration before and after cisplatin infusion has been the mainstay of AKI prevention. The management of hypomagnesemia and neurotoxicity remains largely symptomatic. In an adult population, no therapy has yet demonstrated benefits in the prevention or treatment of platinum-related ototoxicity.

Sub-chronic vortioxetine (but not escitalopram) normalizes brain rhythm alterations and memory deficits induced by serotonin depletion in rats.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a chronic and disabling psychiatric disorder characterized by a wide range of signs/symptoms, including cognitive dysfunction. Vortioxetine (VOR) is a multimodal antidepressant drug with pro-cognitive actions in animal models and MDD patients. The VOR-mediated blockade of 5-HT3-R in a subpopulation of GABA interneurons enhances pyramidal neuron activity in rat medial prefrontal cortex, an effect possibly underlying its pro-cognitive action. Brain oscillations are involved in regulation of cognitive function. We therefore examined VOR effects on oscillatory activity in four brain areas of freely-moving rats (prelimbic cortex, PrL; nucleus accumbens, NAc; dorsal hippocampus, dHPC; paraventricular thalamic nucleus, PVA), in standard and in serotonin-depleted rats showing recognition memory deficits. 4-chloro-dl-phenylalanine (pCPA) markedly reduced low frequency oscillations (LFO, mainly 1 Hz oscillations) and enhanced theta oscillations in PrL and NAc. It also reduced gamma and high frequency oscillations (HFO) in PVA. Subchronic VOR and escitalopram (ESC) treatments had little effect on oscillatory activity in standard rats. However, VOR -but not ESC- prevented recognition memory deficits in 5-HT-depleted rats, and normalized LFO and theta powers in PrL and NAc. In parallel, VOR -but not ESC- prevented the deficit in PrL-dHPC gamma coherence, but not the decrease in gamma and HFO powers in PVA. Overall, this supports a prominent role of serotonergic neurotransmission on brain oscillatory activity, particularly in cortico-striatal pathways linked to short-term recognition memory. Further, VOR prevented pCPA-induced cognitive deficits by normalizing oscillatory activity at lower frequencies in the PrL-NAc pathway, also normalizing the PrL-dHPC coherence at gamma frequencies.

[Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists for postoperative nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis]. / Antagonistas do receptor da neurocinina­1 no tratamento de náusea e vômito no pós­operatório: Revisão sistemática e meta­análise.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) is a common complication of general anesthesia. Several kinds of antiemetics, including 5-Hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists and Neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists, have been used to treat PONV. OBJECTIVES: To compare the antiemetic effect of NK-1 receptor antagonists, including fosaprepitant. DATA SOURCES: Online databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library databases) were used. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) performed in patients over 18 years with ASA-PS of I-III, aimed to assess the efficacy of antiemetics including NK-1 receptor antagonists and 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, and compared the incidence of PONV were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: All statistical assessments were conducted by a random effect approach and odds ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Aprepitant 40mg and 80mg significantly reduced the incidence of vomiting 0-24hours postoperatively (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.40]; 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI 0.30-0.54]; p < 0.001, and OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19-0.56; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant could also reduce the incidence of vomiting significantly both 0-24h and 0-48hours postoperatively (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.24; p < 0.001 and OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.23; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Risk factors for PONV are not considered, RCTs using multiple antiemetics are included, RCTs for fosaprepitant is small, and some bias may be present. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Aprepitant and fosaprepitant can be effective prophylactic antiemetics for postoperative vomiting. However, more studies are required for higher-quality meta-analyses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019120188.

Comparison of two different intravenous serotonin antagonists used for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis in patients treated with moderately emetogenic risk regimens: A retrospective analysis from a large academic medical center.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be a serious and debilitating adverse effect that is highly feared by cancer patients. For patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens at our institution in the ambulatory infusion center, palonosetron was selected as the preferred serotonin (5-HT3) antagonist for CINV prophylaxis per the 2016 NCCN Guidelines, when a neurokinin1 antagonist was not included in the prophylactic regimen. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone and palonosetron versus granisetron for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: This study is an Institutional Review Board-approved, single-center retrospective review of electronic health records including patients who received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens with CINV prophylaxis with dexamethasone and either palonosetron or granisetron. RESULTS: A total of 268 eligible patients were included in the study. Eighty-eight patients received palonosetron and 180 patients received granisetron as their 5-HT3 receptor antagonist between October 31, 2014 and October 31, 2016. There were no statistically significant differences between the two antiemetic groups for the primary outcome of presence of any change in day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics. Nine (10.23%) palonosetron patients and 15 (8.33%) granisetron patients required a change in their day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics (P = 0.610). CONCLUSIONS: Despite palonosetron's better efficacy, longer half-life, and higher binding affinity, the results of this retrospective review demonstrates that the choice of serotonin antagonist, palonosetron or granisetron, did not result in a change in day 1 intravenous prophylactic antiemetics or antiemetic outpatient medications for patients undergoing moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens.

Pharmacokinetic profile of the selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron in the rat: an original study and a minireview of the behavioural pharmacological literature in the rat.

The availability of agonists and antagonists to modulate the activity of the 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) type 3 (5-HT3) receptor has renewed interest in its role as a therapeutic target. Ondansetron is a highly selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that is well tolerated as an anti-emetic for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Preclinical studies in rat have shown the effects of small doses of ondansetron on cognition, behavioural sensitisation, and epilepsy. However, the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of ondansetron in rat has not been described, which limits the translational relevance of these findings. Here, we aim to determine, in the rat, the PK profile of ondansetron in the plasma and to determine associated brain levels. The plasma PK profile was determined following acute subcutaneous administration of ondansetron (0.1, 1, and 10 µg/kg). Brain levels were measured following subcutaneous administration of ondansetron at 1 µg/kg. Plasma and brain levels of ondansetron were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography - tandem mass spectrometry. Following administration of all three doses, measured ondansetron plasma levels (≈30-3000 pg/mL) were below levels achieved with doses usually administered in the clinic, with a rapid absorption phase and a short half-life (≈30-40 min). We also found that brain levels of ondansetron at 1 µg/kg were significantly lower than plasma levels, with brain to plasma ratios of 0.45 and 0.46 in the motor and pre-frontal cortices. We discuss our findings in the context of a minireview of the literature. We hope that our study will be helpful to the design of preclinical studies with therapeutic end-points.

Fluvoxamine combination therapy with tropisetron for obsessive-compulsive disorder patients: A placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: About 50% of obsessive-compulsive disorder patients still suffer significant symptoms even after the recommended first-line therapy. This demonstrates the necessity to investigate strategies to improve alleviation of symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a 5-hydroxytryptophan 3 receptor antagonist, tropisetron, as an adjuvant therapy to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, in ameliorating obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms. METHODS: Men and women between the ages of 18-60 years diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder, based on DSM5, who had a Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive scale score of more than 21 were recruited in a double-blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, clinical trial of 10 weeks to receive either tropisetron (5 mg twice daily) and fluvoxamine (100 mg daily initially followed by 200 mg daily after week 4) or placebo and fluvoxamine. The primary outcome of interest in this study was the Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive scale total score decrease from baseline. RESULTS: One hundred and eight participants were equally randomized into two groups; 48 participants in each group finished the trial. The Yale-Brown obsessive compulsive total score significantly dropped in both groups while the tropisetron group participants experienced a significantly higher decrease in their scores (Greenhouse-Geisser F(1.53-65.87)=3.516, p-value=0.04). No major adverse effect was observed in any of the groups. CONCLUSION: This trial showed a significant efficacy for tropisetron over placebo in treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms when added to fluvoxamine.

Efficacy of Palonosetron as Antiemetic Prophylaxis for Post Operative Patients.

Palonosetron is a new, potent and long-acting 5HT3-receptorsantagonist that had been approved by the FDA for use in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. The objective of this study was to investigate and compare the prophylactic effects of intravenously administered palonosetron, ondansetron and granisetron on prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anesthesia. This randomized double blind prospective clinical study was carried out in the Department of Anaesthesia, DMCH, Dhaka, Bangladesh from January 2014 to December 2015. A total of 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia, out of which patients who received Palonosetron were in Group A (n=34), patients who received Ondansetron were in group B (n=34) and patients who received Granisetron were in group C (n=34) and also the patients were selected randomly by lottery method. Statistical analyses of the results were obtained by using window based computer software devised with Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS-22). Nausea was found 3(8.8%) in group A, 8(23.5%) in group B and 6(17.6%) in group C. Vomiting was found 3(8.8%) in group A, 10(29.4%) in group B and 7(20.6%) in group C. Vomiting was significantly higher in group B compare with group A. For group B rescue anti-emetic injection motilon (metoclopramide hydrochloride) 5mg IV slowly was given. Palonosetron is effective prophylaxis against post operative nausea and vomiting.