-
Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy Jan 2021Perphenazine (PPZ) is a typical antipsychotic that is mainly administrated for the treatment of schizophrenia. Due to its highly lipophilic nature and extensive hepatic...
BACKGROUND
Perphenazine (PPZ) is a typical antipsychotic that is mainly administrated for the treatment of schizophrenia. Due to its highly lipophilic nature and extensive hepatic first-pass metabolism, its oral bioavailability is low (40%).
OBJECTIVE
The novel nanocarriers like solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN) have been reported to be highly effective for improving the therapeutic effect of drugs. Therefore the main scope of the present investigation was the evaluation of characteristics of PPZ-SLN in terms of pharmacokinetic parameters and brain distribution.
METHODS
The PPZ-SLN was prepared by the solvent-emulsification and evaporation method. The storage stability of PPZ-SLN and empty SLN powders was studied for 3 months. pharmacokinetic studies and brain distribution evaluations were performed following a single oral dose administration of PPZ and PPZ-SLN suspensions on male Wistar rats. An HPLC method was established and validated for the quantitative determination of PPZ in plasma and brain samples.
RESULTS
The storage stability studies revealed the good storage stability of the both PPZ-SLN and empty SLN at 4 °C. Compared to PPZ suspension, the relative bioavailability and the brain distribution of PPZ-SLN were increased up to 2-fold and 16-fold, respectively. Mean residence time (MRT) and half-life (t) of PPZ-SLN were significantly ( value < 0.01) increased in both plasma and brain homogenate compared to PPZ suspension.
CONCLUSION
The significant improvement in the pharmacokinetic properties of PPZ following one oral dose indicates that SLN is a promising drug delivery system for PPZ and shows a high potential for successful brain delivery of this antipsychotic.
Topics: Animals; Biological Availability; Brain; Drug Carriers; Lipids; Male; Nanoparticles; Perphenazine; Rats; Rats, Wistar
PubMed: 33307865
DOI: 10.1080/03639045.2020.1862172 -
Plant Science : An International... Jan 2021Our previous study demonstrated that the expression of GhNAC4, a NAC transcription factor from cotton, was induced by abiotic stresses and abscisic acid (ABA). In the...
Our previous study demonstrated that the expression of GhNAC4, a NAC transcription factor from cotton, was induced by abiotic stresses and abscisic acid (ABA). In the present study, we investigated the molecular mechanisms underlying ABA and stress response of GhNAC4. Overexpression of GhNAC4 in transgenic tobacco conferred tolerance to salinity and drought treatments with associated enhanced expression of several stress-responsive marker genes. GhNAC4 is a protein that is translocated to the nucleus where it exhibits transcriptional activation property and also forms homo-dimers. In this study, we also investigated the domains essential for the biochemical functions of GhNAC4. We developed transgenic tobacco plants overexpressing the GhNAC4 NAC-domain and the transcriptional regulatory (TR) domain separately. NAC-domain transgenics showed hypersensitivity to exogenous ABA while TR-domain transgenics exhibited reduced sensitivity. Abiotic stress assays indicated that transgenic plants expressing both the domains separately were more tolerant than wild type plants with the NAC-domain transgenics showing increased tolerance as compared to TR-domain transgenics. Expression analysis revealed that various stress-responsive genes were upregulated in both NAC-domain and TR-domain transgenics under salinity and drought treatments. These results suggest that the stress tolerance ability of GhNAC4 is associated with both the component domains while the ABA responsiveness is largely associated with N-terminal NAC-domain.
Topics: Abscisic Acid; Cloning, Molecular; Dimerization; Gossypium; Lipid Peroxidation; Mutagenesis, Site-Directed; Perphenazine; Plant Growth Regulators; Plant Proteins; Plants, Genetically Modified; Proline; Stress, Physiological; Structure-Activity Relationship; Nicotiana; Transcription Factors; Two-Hybrid System Techniques
PubMed: 33288024
DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2020.110718 -
Schizophrenia Research Apr 2021Accumulated studies have investigated pharmacological interventions for first-episode schizophrenia (FES) patients. However, studies on subsequent treatment steps, which...
Accumulated studies have investigated pharmacological interventions for first-episode schizophrenia (FES) patients. However, studies on subsequent treatment steps, which are essential to guide clinicians, are largely missing. This Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomized Trials comparing Antipsychotic Treatments (SMART-CAT) program intends to evaluate the effectiveness of commonly used antipsychotic drugs in FES patients. The major goals of this study are to examine: 1) what would be the optimal subsequent sequential treatment if the first antipsychotic drug failed; 2) whether clozapine could be used in those first-trial failed and have superior efficacy compared to other atypical antipsychotics. In this article we will report the detail protocol of SMART-CAT. The SMART-CAT is a randomized controlled clinical multicenter trial in which 9 institutions in China will participate. A total of 720 FES patients will be enrolled and followed up for 12 months in this study. The trial includes three treatment phases (each phase lasting for 8 weeks) and a naturalistic follow-up phase; participants who do well on an assigned treatment will remain on that treatment for the duration of the 12-month treatment period, while non-responders will move to the next phase of the study to receive a new treatment. Phase 1 is a randomized controlled trial; patients will be randomly assigned to one of the treatments with oral olanzapine, risperidone, amisulpride, aripiprazole or perphenazine. Subjects who fail to respond after 8 weeks will enter the phase 2 randomization. Phase 2 is an equipoise-stratified randomization trial, and patients will be randomly assigned to oral olanzapine, amisulpride or clozapine for 8 weeks. Subjects who fail to respond after phase 2 will enter an open label trial (phase 3); patients who receive clozapine in phase 2 and fail to respond will be assigned to an extended clozapine treatment or modified electroconvulsive therapy add-on therapy (Phase 3A). Patients who were not assigned to clozapine in phase 2 will be assigned to treatment with clozapine or another SGAs not previously used in phase 1 and 2 (Phase 3B). The primary outcome for the treatment phase is the treatment efficacy rate, which is defined as at least 40% reduction in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. We hypothesize that clozapine is more therapeutically effective than any other SGAs to patients who failed to meet efficacy criteria in Phase 1, and earlier treatment with clozapine can improve the functional outcomes of schizophrenia patients. As for the naturalistic follow-up phase, time to all-cause treatment failure, marked by its discontinuation is selected as the primary outcome, since it reflects both efficacy and side effects. The all-cause discontinuation is defined as discontinuing for any reasons, including poor efficacy, intolerance of adverse reactions, poor compliance and other reasons. The results of the SMART-CAT trial will provide evidence for the selection of antipsychotics in FES patients who fail to respond to the first trial of an antipsychotic drug. It will also provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of using clozapine in the early phase of schizophrenia treatment by comparing with other SGAs. The study is based on the combination of sequential therapy and dynamic therapy, which can be more suitable to assess the effectiveness of treatment options in the real-world clinical setting. As a result, we hope that this study can provide guidance for an optimal treatment algorithm in first-episode schizophrenia patients. Trial registration: ID NCT03510325 in ClinicalTrials.gov.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Benzodiazepines; China; Clozapine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 33279374
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2020.11.010 -
Pharmacological Research Jan 2021Targeted therapies and immunotherapy have brought substantial benefits to patients with melanoma. However, brain metastases remain the biggest threat to the survival and...
Targeted therapies and immunotherapy have brought substantial benefits to patients with melanoma. However, brain metastases remain the biggest threat to the survival and quality of life of melanoma patients. One of the major challenges to an effective therapy is the inability of drugs to penetrate the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Anti-schizophrenic drugs can cross the BBB, and many of them have demonstrated anti-cancer effects. Repurposing existing drugs for new clinical indications is an alluring strategy for anticancer drug discovery. Herein, we applied this strategy and screened a small collection of existing anti-schizophrenic drugs to use as anti-melanoma agents. Among them, trifluoperazine dihydrochloride (TFP) exhibited promising potencies for suppressing the growth and metastasis of melanoma, both in vitro and in vivo. TFP obviously suppressed the viability of melanoma cells within the micromolar range and inhibited the growth of melanoma in the subcutaneous mice models. Notably, intraperitoneal (i.p.) administration of TFP (40 mg/kg/day) obviously inhibited the growth of intra-carotid-injection established melanoma brain metastasis and extended the survival of brain metastasis-bearing mice. Moreover, TFP significantly suppressed lung metastasis and bone metastasis of melanoma in preclinical metastasis models. Mechanistically, TFP caused G0/G1 cell cycle arrest and mitochondrial-dependent intrinsic apoptosis of melanoma cells. In addition, TFP treatment increased the expression of microtubule associated protein 1 light chain 3 beta-II (LC3B-II) and p62 in vitro, suggesting an inhibition of autophagic flux. TFP decreased LysoTracker Red uptake after treatment, indicating impaired acidification of lysosomes. Moreover, the colocalization of LC3 with lysosomal-associated membrane protein 1 (LAMP1), a lysosome marker, was also suppressed after TFP treatment, suggesting that TFP might block the fusion of autophagosomes with lysosomes, which led to autophagosome accumulation. Taken together, our data highlight the potential of repurposing TFP as a new adjuvant drug for treating melanoma patients with brain, lung, and bone metastases.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Autophagy; Bone Neoplasms; Brain Neoplasms; Cell Cycle; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Survival; Drug Repositioning; Female; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Melanoma; Membrane Potential, Mitochondrial; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Skin Neoplasms; Trifluoperazine; Mice
PubMed: 33176207
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105295 -
Annals of Neurology Feb 2021Advances in genetic discoveries have created substantial opportunities for precision medicine in neurodevelopmental disorders. Many of the genes implicated in these...
Advances in genetic discoveries have created substantial opportunities for precision medicine in neurodevelopmental disorders. Many of the genes implicated in these diseases encode proteins that regulate gene expression, such as chromatin-associated proteins, transcription factors, and RNA-binding proteins. The identification of targeted therapeutics for individuals carrying mutations in these genes remains a challenge, as the encoded proteins can theoretically regulate thousands of downstream targets in a considerable number of cell types. Here, we propose the application of a drug discovery approach originally developed for cancer called "transcriptome reversal" for these neurodevelopmental disorders. This approach attempts to identify compounds that reverse gene-expression signatures associated with disease states. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:199-211.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Carbamazepine; Computer Simulation; Drug Discovery; Epirizole; Gene Expression Profiling; Gene Expression Regulation; Humans; Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells; MCF-7 Cells; Mice; Naloxone; Narcotic Antagonists; Neural Stem Cells; Neurodevelopmental Disorders; Neurons; PC-3 Cells; Perphenazine; Primary Cell Culture; RNA-Seq; Risperidone; Single-Cell Analysis; Transcriptome; Trazodone; Trimipramine
PubMed: 33159466
DOI: 10.1002/ana.25950 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology May 2021To investigate the impact of cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) on dose-adjusted serum concentrations of flupentixol, haloperidol, perphenazine and zuclopenthixol in a...
AIMS
To investigate the impact of cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) on dose-adjusted serum concentrations of flupentixol, haloperidol, perphenazine and zuclopenthixol in a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) cohort of psychiatric patients. We also studied the functional impact of CYP2D6*41 on dose-adjusted serum concentrations in the perphenazine-treated patients.
METHODS
Serum concentrations of flupentixol, haloperidol, perphenazine and zuclopenthixol from CYP-genotyped patients were extracted retrospectively from a routine TDM database in the period March 2005 to May 2019. Samples were divided into three CYP2D6 phenotype subgroups according to genotype; normal metabolizers (NMs), intermediate metabolizers (IMs) and poor metabolizers (PMs). The effect of CYP2D6 phenotype on dose-adjusted serum concentrations of the four antipsychotics was evaluated by multivariable mixed model analyses.
RESULTS
Mean dose-adjusted serum concentrations of perphenazine (564 samples) were 3.9-fold and 1.6-fold higher in CYP2D6 PMs and IMs, respectively, compared with NMs (P < .001 and P < .01). For zuclopenthixol (658 samples), mean dose-adjusted serum concentrations were about 1.5-fold and 1.3-fold higher in CYP2D6 PMs and IMs, respectively, compared with NMs (P < .01 and P < .001). CYP2D6 was of minor or no importance to haloperidol (320 samples) and flupentixol (115 samples). In our data material, the genotype CYP2D6 *1/*41 appears to have a similar impact on dose-adjusted serum concentrations of perphenazine as *1/null (null = variant allele encoding no enzyme function).
CONCLUSIONS
This study shows that CYP2D6 is important for the metabolism of perphenazine and zuclopenthixol, but not for haloperidol and flupentixol. The CYP2D6*41 allele appears to have a reduced function close to nonfunctional variant alleles.
Topics: Clopenthixol; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Flupenthixol; Genotype; Haloperidol; Humans; Perphenazine; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33118660
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14626 -
Journal of B.U.ON. : Official Journal... 2020In the effort to improve treatment effectiveness in glioblastoma, this short note reviewed collected data on the pathophysiology of glioblastoma with particular... (Review)
Review
In the effort to improve treatment effectiveness in glioblastoma, this short note reviewed collected data on the pathophysiology of glioblastoma with particular reference to intersections with the pharmacology of perphenazine. That study identified five areas of potentially beneficial intersection. Data showed seemingly 5 independent perphenazine attributes of benefit to glioblastoma treatment - i) blocking dopamine receptor 2, ii) reducing centrifugal migration of subventricular zone cells by blocking dopamine receptor 3, iii) blocking serotonin receptor 7, iv) activation of protein phosphatase 2, and v) nausea reduction. Perphenazine is fully compatible with current chemoirradiation protocols and with the commonly used ancillary medicines used in clinical practice during the course of glioblastoma. All these attributes argue for a trial of perphenazine's addition to current standard treatment with temozolomide and irradiation. The subventricular zone seeds the brain with mutated cells that become recurrent glioblastoma after centrifugal migration. The current paper shows how perphenazine might reduce that contribution. Perphenazine is an old, generic, cheap, phenothiazine antipsychotic drug that has been in continuous clinical use worldwide since the 1950's. Clinical experience and research data over these decades have shown perphenazine to be well-tolerated in psychiatric populations, in normals, and in non-psychiatric, medically ill populations for whom perphenazine is used to reduce nausea. For now (Summer, 2020) the nature of glioblastoma requires a polypharmacy approach until/unless a core feature and means to address it can be identified in the future. Conclusions: Perphenazine possesses a remarkable constellation of attributes that recommend its use in GB treatment.
Topics: Dopamine Antagonists; Glioblastoma; Humans; Perphenazine
PubMed: 33099901
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Psychiatric Research Jan 2021We investigated the association between discontinuation due to withdrawal of consent (DWC) in schizophrenia trials and the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
We investigated the association between discontinuation due to withdrawal of consent (DWC) in schizophrenia trials and the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI-APs). In two categorical meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, we compared DWC: individual and pooled LAI-APs vs. (1) placebo and (2) oral antipsychotics (OAPs). We also performed conducted a single-group meta-analysis to calculate the average DWC and a meta-regression analysis to examine the association between the results of the meta-analyses and factors related to study design, treatment, and patients. We identified 52 studies (total adult patients = 18,675, LAI-APs = 12,613, placebo = 2,083, and OAPs = 3,979; median study duration = 32 weeks). DWC was higher for LAI-aripiprazole than for the placebo [risk ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.70 (1.23-2.39)]. Neither pooled nor individual LAI-APs differed from the placebo for fluphenazine, olanzapine, paliperidone, and risperidone or from the OAPs for aripiprazole, fluphenazine, haloperidol, olanzapine, paliperidone, risperidone, and zuclopenthixol. The average DWC of each LAI-AP was as follows: LAI-aripiprazole = 10.98%, LAI-fluphenazine = 7.65%, LAI-flupenthixol = 3.33%, LAI-haloperidol = 6.71%, LAI-olanzapine = 10.50%, LAI-paliperidone = 10.38%, LAI-perphenazine = 7.06%, LAI-risperidone = 10.39%, LAI-zuclopenthixol = 4.45%, pooled LAI-APs = 9.88%, and placebo = 11.17%. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that publication year (β = 0.02), percentage of males (β = 0.02), and mean age (β = 0.05) were associated with an average DWC for pooled LAI-APs. Study duration (β = -0.03), percentage of males (β = 0.08), and patient status (β = -0.85) were associated with an average DWC for LAI-aripiprazole. Presence of a placebo arm (β = 1.60) was associated with an average DWC for LAI-fluphenazine. LAI-AP use was unlikely to be associated with DWC. Although the LAI-aripiprazole had a higher DWC than did the placebo, its average DWC was similar to other those of LAI-APs.
Topics: Adult; Antipsychotic Agents; Delayed-Action Preparations; Humans; Male; Paliperidone Palmitate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 33096355
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.10.009 -
BJPsych Open Oct 2020Understanding the patterns of treatment response is critical for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia; one way to achieve this is through using a longitudinal...
BACKGROUND
Understanding the patterns of treatment response is critical for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia; one way to achieve this is through using a longitudinal dynamic process study design.
AIMS
This study aims to explore the response trajectory of antipsychotics and compare the treatment responses of seven different antipsychotics over 6 weeks in patients with schizoprenia (trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-10000934).
METHOD
Data were collected from a multicentre, randomised open-label clinical trial. Patients were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at baseline and follow-up at weeks 2, 4 and 6. Trajectory groups were classified by the method of k-means cluster modelling for longitudinal data. Trajectory analyses were also employed for the seven antipsychotic groups.
RESULTS
The early treatment response trajectories were classified into a high-trajectory group of better responders and a low-trajectory group of worse responders. The results of trajectory analysis showed differences compared with the classification method characterised by a 50% reduction in PANSS scores at week 6. A total of 349 patients were inconsistently grouped by the two methods, with a significant difference in the composition ratio of treatment response groups using these two methods (χ2 = 43.37, P < 0.001). There was no differential contribution of high- and low trajectories to different drugs (χ2 = 12.52, P = 0.051); olanzapine and risperidone, which had a larger proportion in the >50% reduction at week 6, performed better than aripiprazole, quetiapine, ziprasidone and perphenazine.
CONCLUSIONS
The trajectory analysis of treatment response to schizophrenia revealed two distinct trajectories. Comparing the treatment responses to different antipsychotics through longitudinal analysis may offer a new perspective for evaluating antipsychotics.
PubMed: 33090091
DOI: 10.1192/bjo.2020.105 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects.
OBJECTIVES
• To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, General; Antiemetics; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Placebos; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33075160
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2