Nomogram for predicting opioid-induced nausea and vomiting for cancer pain patients.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting are frequently observed as an adverse effect in the treatment of cancer-related pain. The factors that affect OINV in cancer patients remain unclear. In this study, we developed a nomogram for predicting the occurrence of OINV in this population using retrospective clinical data. METHODS: We collected data from 416 cancer pain patients, 70% of whom used the training set to analyze demographic and clinical variables. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify significant factors associated with OINV. Then, we construct a prediction nomogram. The validation set comprises the remaining 30%. The reliability of the nomogram is evaluated by bootstrap resampling. RESULTS: Using multivariate logistic regression, we identified five significant factors associated with OINV. The C-index was 0.835 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.828-0.842) for the training set and 0.810 (95% CI, 0.793-0.826) for the validation set. The calibrated curves show a good agreement between the predicted and actual occurrence of OINV. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective study based on five saliency-found variables, we developed and proved a reliable nomogram model to predict OINV in cancer pain patients. Future prospective studies should assess the model's reliability and usefulness in clinical practice.

Prophylactic use of antiemetics for prevention of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting: a survey about Italian physicians' practice.

PURPOSE: Antiemetics are being used both for the treatment and prophylaxis of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) in clinical practice, despite the lack of evidence for the prophylactic benefit. Studies among Japanese physicians demonstrated over 80% prescribe antiemetics, with neuroleptic antipsychotics as the most commonly prescribed drugs. Our objective was to elucidate the current scenario of the prophylactic use of antiemetics for OINV among Italian physicians. METHODS: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional national survey. All the invited participants received an e-mail with an 11-item electronic questionnaire accessible through a direct link. Anonymity was guaranteed. According to the exploratory intent of the survey, we did not predefine any formal statistical hypothesis. Associations between variables were tested by the Pearson chi-square or the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: From January to March 2017, 112 completed the electronic questionnaire (112/256, overall response rate, 43.7%). Nearly half of the participants were oncologists (54; 48.2%). Sixty-one (54.4%) physicians worked in palliative care units. About 45% of the interviewed prescribed prophylactic antiemetics at the beginning of opioid prescription. The most commonly chosen drugs for this purpose were prokinetics such as metoclopramide and domperidone (84%), followed by 5-HT3 antagonists (8%), neuroleptic antipsychotics (6%), and corticosteroids (2%). Ninety-one physicians (81%) declared to prescribe antiemetics at the occurrence of OINV, mainly prokinetics (N = 70; 77%). CONCLUSION: Italian physicians do not commonly prescribe prophylactic antiemetics for OINV. Unlike previously reported data, dopamine antagonists resulted the most commonly prescribed drugs. Prospective clinical trials are necessary to evaluate the real efficacy of this practice.

Prevention of Opioid-Induced Nausea and Vomiting During Treatment of Moderate to Severe Acute Pain: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial Comparing CL-108 (Hydrocodone 7.5 mg/Acetaminophen 325 mg/Rapid-Release, Low-Dose Promethazine 12.5 mg) with Conventional Hydrocodone 7.5 mg/Acetaminophen 325 mg.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevention of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the relief of moderate to severe acute pain by CL-108, a novel drug combining a low-dose antiemetic (rapid-release promethazine 12.5 mg) with hydrocodone 7.5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg (HC/APAP) was used. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled multidose study. After surgical extraction of two or more impacted third molar teeth (including at least one mandibular impaction), 466 patients with moderate to severe pain (measured on a categorical pain intensity scale [PI-CAT]) were randomized to CL-108, HC/APAP, or placebo. Over the next 24 hours, patients used the PI-CAT to assess pain at regular intervals whereas nausea, vomiting, and other opioid-related side effects were also assessed prospectively. Study medications were taken every four to six hours as needed; supplemental rescue analgesic and antiemetic medications were permitted. Co-primary end points were the incidence of OINV and the time-weighted sum of pain intensity differences over 24 hours (SPID24). RESULTS: Relative to HC/APAP treatment alone, CL-108 treatment reduced OINV by 64% (P < 0.001). Treatment with CL-108 significantly reduced pain intensity compared with placebo (SPID24 = 16.2 vs 3.5, P < 0.001). There were no unexpected or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: CL-108 is a safe and effective combination analgesic/antiemetic for the prevention of OINV during treatment of moderate to severe acute pain.

The efficacy of prophylactic prochlorperazine injections at the initiation of opioid injections in preventing opioid-induced nausea and vomiting among patients with end-stage cancer.

Objectives: Antiemetics have been widely recommended for treating opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV). According to a previous study, the use of prophylactic prochlorperazine at the initiation of treatment with oral oxycodone was ineffective in preventing OINV. This study examined whether prochlorperazine injection prevents OINV and induces drowsiness in patients with end-stage cancer (a different patient population from the previous study). Methods: Patients with end-stage cancer who received opioid injections for more than 5 days between April 2017 and March 2020 were classified into two groups: the opioid and prochlorperazine injection group and opioid alone group. Their systemic conditions were evaluated on the basis of the performance status and the palliative performance scale, a prognostic indicator. Results: Of 325 patients who received opioid treatment during the study period, 156 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 103 patients and 53 patients were classified into the opioid and prochlorperazine injection group (prochlorperazine) and opioid alone groups (placebo) , respectively. There was no significant difference in characteristics, age, gender, performance status, or palliative performance scale results between the 2 groups. OINV developed in 4 patients in the opioid and prochlorperazine injection groups and in 1 patient in the opioid alone group. Given that sleep disturbance develops in many patients with end-stage cancer who had a specific condition, it is difficult to conclude regarding the relationship between prochlorperazine injection and drowsiness, although this study examined this relationship. Conclusions: As with the previous study, prophylactic prochlorperazine injection was ineffective in preventing OINV in patients who received opioid injections.

Naldemedine: Peripherally Acting Opioid Receptor Antagonist for Treating Opioid-induced Adverse Effects.

Opioids are widely used for pain management in moderate-to-severe pain. However, opioids are associated with adverse events, such as constipation and emesis/vomiting. To reduce these undesired effects, a structure-activity relationship study of morphinan derivatives was conducted, and a promising lead compound with inhibitory effects on opioid receptors was obtained. Further improvement in the potency and pharmacokinetic profiles of the lead compound led to the discovery of naldemedine, which showed anti-constipation and anti-emetic effects against these adverse events that were induced by morphine without influencing morphine's analgesic effect. Naldemedine was launched in Japan and the USA in 2017 and in the EU in 2019, for treating opioid-induced constipation.

Preventive effects of naldemedine, peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, on morphine-induced nausea and vomiting in ferrets.

AIMS: Naldemedine is a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). We investigated the preventive effect of naldemedine on morphine-induced nausea and vomiting in ferrets and conducted a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis. MAIN METHODS: The antiemetic effect of naldemedine was evaluated as the frequency and time of retching (rhythmic abdominal contractile motion) and vomiting (throwing up vomit or similar reactions) caused by morphine in ferrets. After a single oral administration of naldemedine to ferrets, the plasma concentrations of naldemedine and morphine were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. KEY FINDINGS: Naldemedine showed a potent and dose-dependent anti-emetic effects against morphine-induced emetic responses, for up to 6 h. The dose of naldemedine that produced half the maximal effect (ED50) value for anti-emetic effect of naldemedine in the morphine-treated ferrets was 0.033 mg/kg. The PK/PD analysis revealed that the antiemetic effect was related to the plasma naldemedine concentration, with a half maximal effective concentration that produces half the maximal effect (EC50) of 3.51 ng/mL. The plasma concentration producing an antiemetic effect was almost 200-fold lower than that inducing an anti-analgesic effect in rats. SIGNIFICANCE: Naldemedine showed potent inhibition of morphine-induced vomiting for up to 6 h after dosing. These data suggest that naldemedine possesses antiemetic properties and could be effective against opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV).