-
Cancer Treatment Reviews Apr 2024Cancer-related pain often requires opioid treatment with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) as its most frequent gastrointestinal side-effect. Both for prevention and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer-related pain often requires opioid treatment with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) as its most frequent gastrointestinal side-effect. Both for prevention and treatment of OIC osmotic (e.g. polyethylene glycol) and stimulant (e.g. bisacodyl) laxatives are widely used. Newer drugs such as the peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) and naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone have become available for the management of OIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to give an overview of the scientific evidence on pharmacological strategies for the prevention and treatment of OIC in cancer patients.
METHODS
A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library was completed from inception up to 22 October 2022. Randomized and non-randomized studies were systematically selected. Bowel function and adverse drug events were assessed.
RESULTS
Twenty trials (prevention: five RCTs and three cohort studies; treatment: ten RCTs and two comparative cohort studies) were included in the review. Regarding the prevention of OIC, three RCTs compared laxatives with other laxatives, finding no clear differences in effectivity of the laxatives used. One cohort study showed a significant benefit of magnesium oxide compared with no laxative. One RCT found a significant benefit for the PAMORA naldemedine compared with magnesium oxide. Preventive use of oxycodone/naloxone did not show a significant difference in two out of three other studies compared to oxycodone or fentanyl. A meta-analysis was not possible. Regarding the treatment of OIC, two RCTs compared laxatives, of which one RCT found that polyethylene glycol was significantly more effective than sennosides. Seven studies compared an opioid antagonist (naloxone, methylnaltrexone or naldemedine) with placebo and three studies compared different dosages of opioid antagonists. These studies with opioid antagonists were used for the meta-analysis. Oxycodone/naloxone showed a significant improvement in Bowel Function Index compared to oxycodone with laxatives (MD -13.68; 95 % CI -18.38 to -8.98; I = 58 %). Adverse drug event rates were similar amongst both groups, except for nausea in favour of oxycodone/naloxone (RR 0.51; 95 % CI 0.31-0.83; I = 0 %). Naldemedine (NAL) and methylnaltrexone (MNTX) demonstrated significantly higher response rates compared to placebo (NAL: RR 2.07, 95 % CI 1.64-2.61, I = 0 %; MNTX: RR 3.83, 95 % CI 2.81-5.22, I = 0 %). With regard to adverse events, abdominal pain was more present in treatment with methylnaltrexone and diarrhea was significantly more present in treatment with naldemedine. Different dosages of methylnaltrexone were not significantly different with regard to both efficacy and adverse drug event rates.
CONCLUSIONS
Magnesium oxide and naldemedine are most likely effective for prevention of OIC in cancer patients. Naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone, naldemedine and methylnaltrexone effectively treat OIC in cancer patients with acceptable adverse events. However, their effect has not been compared to standard (osmotic and stimulant) laxatives. More studies comparing standard laxatives with each other and with opioid antagonists are necessary before recommendations for clinical practice can be made.
Topics: Humans; Laxatives; Analgesics, Opioid; Narcotic Antagonists; Constipation; Oxycodone; Opioid-Induced Constipation; Magnesium Oxide; Cohort Studies; Naloxone; Polyethylene Glycols; Neoplasms; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Quaternary Ammonium Compounds; Naltrexone
PubMed: 38452708
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2024.102704 -
Cureus Mar 2024Guided bone regeneration (GBR) plays a crucial role in the augmentation of alveolar bone, especially in cases of dental implants. The main principle behind using... (Review)
Review
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) plays a crucial role in the augmentation of alveolar bone, especially in cases of dental implants. The main principle behind using membranes in guided tissue regeneration (GTR) is to prevent epithelial downgrowth as well as connective tissue on the root surface. However, the membranes lack some major properties, such as osteogenic and antimicrobial properties. Magnesium (Mg) is one of the biodegradable materials that is gaining interest because of its favourable mechanical properties and biocompatibility. It also possesses pro-osteogenic properties and significant inhibition of biofilm formation and maturation. These features have attracted increasing interest in using magnesium oxide nanoparticles in GBR membrane applications. This systematic review assesses the osteogenic potential of magnesium oxide nanoparticles in periodontal bone regeneration. The literature search used PubMed, PubMed Central, Medline, and Cochrane databases to examine systematic reviews published till March 2023. Seven articles were included based on the selection criteria. We included all in vitro and in vivo clinical studies based on the osteogenic potential of magnesium oxide nanoparticles in periodontal bone regeneration. The seven studies provided evidence that magnesium oxide nanoparticles, when incorporated in any substrate, showed higher osteogenic potential in terms of higher alkaline phosphatase levels, bone volume fraction, and bone mineral density. The optimum concentration of magnesium oxide can be an ideal additive to various substrates to promote bone regeneration. Because most of the studies were conducted on calvarial defects, further studies should focus only on bone regeneration related to periodontal regeneration.
PubMed: 38571856
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.55502 -
Cureus Apr 2024Self-treatment with vitamin, mineral, and herbal supplements has become increasingly common among patients for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Magnesium, in... (Review)
Review
Self-treatment with vitamin, mineral, and herbal supplements has become increasingly common among patients for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Magnesium, in particular, is popular on social media for the treatment of anxiety and insomnia. Meanwhile, preclinical studies support associations between magnesium status, sleep quality, and symptoms of anxiety. The extent to which these claims are evidence-based is unclear. Therefore, a systematic review was performed to provide an updated examination of the clinical evidence on the use of magnesium for the treatment of the above conditions given the popularity of such supplements among patients and the public at large. A thorough search of the PubMed database was performed and results were systematically reviewed using PRISMA guidelines. The search was limited to anxiety disorders and sleep disorders and included interventional trials only. Exclusion criteria included insufficient (<50 mg/12.5% of recommended daily allowance (RDA)) or unknown magnesium dose, >3 other potentially active compounds present in the formulation, and articles in languages other than English. This query returned 860 articles of which 15 met full inclusion criteria. Eight measured sleep-related outcomes, seven measured anxiety-related outcomes, and one examined both. Sleep quality was measured most frequently using the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Anxiety measures included self-reported measures such as the Hamilton Anxiety Scale. The majority of included studies demonstrated improvement in at least one sleep- or anxiety-related parameter. Five out of eight sleep-related studies reported improvements in sleep parameters, while two studies reported no improvements, and one reported mixed results. Five out of seven studies measuring anxiety-related outcomes reported improvements in self-reported anxiety. Firm conclusions were limited by the heterogeneity of the data and the small number of participants involved in most of the studies. The dosages, formulations, and durations of the magnesium interventions used also differed across studies. Furthermore, some studies included additional, potentially active ingredients, further complicating interpretations. Given the generally positive results across studies, the preponderance of preclinical evidence, and minimal side effects, however, supplemental magnesium is likely useful in the treatment of mild anxiety and insomnia, particularly in those with low magnesium status at baseline. Notably, both negative anxiety trials featured populations with underlying endocrine factors likely contributing to their symptoms (patients with premenstrual symptoms and post-partum women). Nonetheless, larger, randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm efficacy and to establish the most effective forms and dosages of magnesium for the treatment of insomnia and anxiety disorders.
PubMed: 38817505
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59317