-
Medical Principles and Practice :... 2022Several forms of cannabinoids are currently being used to manage nausea and vomiting (N/V). Emerging cases of refractory N/V associated with chronic cannabis use among...
INTRODUCTION
Several forms of cannabinoids are currently being used to manage nausea and vomiting (N/V). Emerging cases of refractory N/V associated with chronic cannabis use among adults and older patients have been reported named cannabis hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). CHS is a condition that leads to repeated and severe N/V in long-term users of cannabinoids.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to outline current treatments for the management of CHS.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Databases were used to search for articles on CHS published from January 2009 to June 2021, yielding 225 results of which 17 were deemed relevant and underwent review by 2 separate reviewers.
RESULTS
The duration of cannabis administration ranged between 6 months to 11 years may precipitate symptoms of CHS. The Rome IV diagnostic criteria of CHS require cannabinoid use and persistence of N/V symptoms for at least the past 6 months. Cannabis cessation is noted to be the most successful management, but other treatments also demonstrated symptom relief; these include hot water hydrotherapy, topical capsaicin cream, haloperidol, droperidol, benzodiazepines, propranolol, and aprepitant administration.
CONCLUSION
More research on CHS is needed to enhance knowledge translation, education, and create awareness in the medical community on the side effects of cannabinoids and to propose the best treatment options.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Cannabinoids; Cannabis; Humans; Marijuana Abuse; Syndrome; Vomiting
PubMed: 34724666
DOI: 10.1159/000520417 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Jul 2016We examined the efficacy of olanzapine for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
We examined the efficacy of olanzapine for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.
METHODS
In a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we compared olanzapine with placebo, in combination with dexamethasone, aprepitant or fosaprepitant, and a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3-receptor antagonist, in patients with no previous chemotherapy who were receiving cisplatin (≥70 mg per square meter of body-surface area) or cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin. The doses of the three concomitant drugs administered before and after chemotherapy were similar in the two groups. The two groups received either 10 mg of olanzapine orally or matching placebo daily on days 1 through 4. Nausea prevention was the primary end point; a complete response (no emesis and no use of rescue medication) was a secondary end point.
RESULTS
In the analysis, we included 380 patients who could be evaluated (192 assigned to olanzapine, and 188 to placebo). The proportion of patients with no chemotherapy-induced nausea was significantly greater with olanzapine than with placebo in the first 24 hours after chemotherapy (74% vs. 45%, P=0.002), the period from 25 to 120 hours after chemotherapy (42% vs. 25%, P=0.002), and the overall 120-hour period (37% vs. 22%, P=0.002). The complete-response rate was also significantly increased with olanzapine during the three periods: 86% versus 65% (P<0.001), 67% versus 52% (P=0.007), and 64% versus 41% (P<0.001), respectively. Although there were no grade 5 toxic effects, some patients receiving olanzapine had increased sedation (severe in 5%) on day 2.
CONCLUSIONS
Olanzapine, as compared with placebo, significantly improved nausea prevention, as well as the complete-response rate, among previously untreated patients who were receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02116530.).
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Aprepitant; Benzodiazepines; Dexamethasone; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Nausea; Olanzapine; Vomiting
PubMed: 27410922
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1515725 -
Anaesthesia Jul 2021Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia. Although dozens of different anti-emetics are available for clinical practice, there is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia. Although dozens of different anti-emetics are available for clinical practice, there is currently no comparative ranking of efficacy and safety of these drugs to inform clinical practice. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analyses to compare, and rank in terms of efficacy and safety, single anti-emetic drugs and their combinations, including 5-hydroxytryptamine , dopamine-2 and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists; corticosteroids; antihistamines; and anticholinergics used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia. We systematically searched for placebo-controlled and head-to-head randomised controlled trials up to November 2017 (updated in April 2020). We assessed how trustworthy the evidence was using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approaches for vomiting within 24 h postoperatively, serious adverse events, any adverse event and drug class-specific side-effects. We included 585 trials (97,516 participants, 83% women) testing 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations. The studies' overall risk of bias was assessed as low in only 27% of the studies. In 282 trials, 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs lowered the risk of vomiting at least 20% compared with placebo. In the ranking of treatments, combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs. Single neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists were as effective as other drug combinations. Out of the 10 effective single drugs, certainty of evidence was high for aprepitant, with risk ratio (95%CI) 0.26 (0.18-0.38); ramosetron, 0.44 (0.32-0.59); granisetron, 0.45 (0.38-0.54); dexamethasone, 0.51 (0.44-0.57); and ondansetron, 0.55 (0.51-0.60). It was moderate for fosaprepitant, 0.06 (0.02-0.21) and droperidol, 0.61 (0.54-0.69). Granisetron and amisulpride are likely to have little or no increase in any adverse event compared with placebo, while dimenhydrinate and scopolamine may increase the number of patients with any adverse event compared with placebo. So far, there is no convincing evidence that other single drugs effect the incidence of serious, or any, adverse events when compared with placebo. Among drug class specific side-effects, evidence for single drugs is mostly not convincing. There is convincing evidence regarding the prophylactic effect of at least seven single drugs for postoperative vomiting such that future studies investigating these drugs will probably not change the estimated beneficial effect. However, there is still considerable lack of evidence regarding safety aspects that does warrant investigation.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, General; Antiemetics; Female; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33170514
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15295 -
BMC Cancer May 2023Aprepitant, as a neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) antagonist, originally applied for curing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, has been reported to have significant...
BACKGROUND
Aprepitant, as a neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) antagonist, originally applied for curing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, has been reported to have significant antitumor effect on several malignant tumors. However, the effect of aprepitant on gallbladder cancer (GBC) is not clear yet. This study aimed to investigate the anti-tumor activity of aprepitant on GBC and the potential mechanisms.
METHODS
The NK-1R expression of gallbladder cancer cells were examined by immunofluorescence. MTT assay, wound healing and transwell migration assay were applied to detect the effect of aprepitant on cell proliferation, migration and invasion. Flow cytometry was used to detect the apoptosis rate. The effects of aprepitant on the expressions of cytokine were examined by real-time quantitative PCR and MAPK activation were detected via immunofluorescence and western blotting. Besides, xenograft model was established to investigate the effect of aprepitant in vivo.
RESULTS
Our results indicated that NK-1R was markedly expressed in gallbladder cancer cells and aprepitant effectively inhibited the proliferation, migration and invasion. Furthermore, the apoptosis, ROS and inflammation response were significantly boosted by aprepitant in GBC. Aprepitant induced NF-κB p65 nuclear translocationin and increased the expressions of p-P65, p-Akt, p-JNK, p-ERK and p-P38, as well as the mRNA levels of inflammatory cytokines IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α. Consistently, aprepitant suppressed the growth of GBC in xenograft mice model.
CONCLUSION
Our study demonstrated that aprepitant could inhibit the development of gallbladder cancer via inducing ROS and MAPK activation, which suggested that aprepitant may become a promising therapeutic drug against GBC.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Mice; Gallbladder Neoplasms; Aprepitant; Reactive Oxygen Species; Carcinoma in Situ; Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal
PubMed: 37221457
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10954-8 -
The Oncologist Apr 2015Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event associated with anticancer treatment that can have a significant adverse impact on patient... (Review)
Review
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event associated with anticancer treatment that can have a significant adverse impact on patient health-related quality of life and that can potentially undermine the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Traditional regimens to prevent CINV generally involved a combination of a corticosteroid plus a 5-hydroxytryptamine (5HT3) receptor antagonist (RA). In the past 10 years, antiemetic treatment has greatly advanced with the availability of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA) aprepitant and its prodrug fosaprepitant. NK1 RAs have a different mechanism of action in CINV than corticosteroids and 5HT3 RAs, thus their use can complement traditional antiemetic drugs and can enhance control of CINV. This review examined accumulated data regarding the safety and efficacy of aprepitant and fosaprepitant over the decade since the first regulatory approval. Data from key studies of aprepitant and fosaprepitant in the prevention of CINV in patients receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy were explored, as were recommendations in currently available guidelines for their use. In addition, their use as antiemetic therapy in special patient populations was highlighted. Future perspectives on potential uses of aprepitant and fosaprepitant for indications other than CINV are presented.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Aprepitant; Drug Interactions; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Morpholines; Nausea; Stem Cell Transplantation; Vomiting
PubMed: 25795636
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0229 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Oct 2017Aprepitant and fosaprepitant, commonly used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, alter cytochrome P450 activity. This systematic review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
Aprepitant and fosaprepitant, commonly used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, alter cytochrome P450 activity. This systematic review evaluates clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug interactions with aprepitant and fosaprepitant and describes adverse events ascribed to drug interactions with aprepitant or fosaprepitant.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed the literature to September 11, 2016, to identify articles evaluating drug interactions involving aprepitant/fosaprepitant. The clinical significance of each reported pharmacokinetic drug interaction was evaluated based on the United States Food and Drug Administration guidance document on conducting drug interaction studies. The probability of an adverse event reported in case reports being due to a drug interaction with aprepitant/fosaprepitant was determined using the Drug Interaction Probability Scale.
RESULTS
A total of 4377 publications were identified. Of these, 64 met inclusion eligibility criteria: 34 described pharmacokinetic drug interactions and 30 described adverse events ascribed to a drug interaction. Clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and bosutinib PO, cabazitaxel IV, cyclophosphamide IV, dexamethasone PO, methylprednisolone IV, midazolam PO/IV, oxycodone PO and tolbutamide PO were identified, as were adverse events resulting from an interaction between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and alcohol, anthracyclines, ifosfamide, oxycodone, quetiapine, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and warfarin.
CONCLUSIONS
The potential for a drug interaction with aprepitant and fosaprepitant should be considered when selecting antiemetic therapy.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Aprepitant; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C9 Inducers; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors; Drug Interactions; Ethanol; Humans; Injection Site Reaction; Morpholines; Nausea; Oxycodone; Quetiapine Fumarate; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors; Vomiting
PubMed: 28470980
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13322 -
Australian Prescriber Apr 2020Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms with many possible causes, including the adverse effects of drugs. If a drug is indicated, the cause guides the choice of... (Review)
Review
Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms with many possible causes, including the adverse effects of drugs. If a drug is indicated, the cause guides the choice of antiemetic drug The main antiemetic classes include antagonists of the serotonin, dopamine, histamine, muscarinic and neurokinin systems, corticosteroids and benzodiazepines. Some antiemetics appear more effective for specific indications Serotonin and neurokinin antagonists, such as ondansetron and aprepitant, are highly effective in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Metoclopramide and antihistamines are first-line options for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy Serotonin antagonists and some dopamine antagonists, such as metoclopramide, can prolong the QT interval on the ECG. Dopamine antagonists can cause extrapyramidal adverse effects, particularly in children
PubMed: 32346211
DOI: 10.18773/austprescr.2020.011 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2021Substance P contributes to the pathogenesis of pain by acting on NK-1R, specialized sensory neurons that detect noxious stimuli. Aprepitant, an antagonist of NK-1R, is...
Substance P contributes to the pathogenesis of pain by acting on NK-1R, specialized sensory neurons that detect noxious stimuli. Aprepitant, an antagonist of NK-1R, is widely used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. In this study, we used LPS-stimulated BV-2 microglia cell line and animal models of inflammatory pain to explore the analgesic effect of aprepitant on inflammatory pain and its underlying mechanism. The excitability of DRG neurons were measured using whole-cell patch-clamp recordings. The behavioral tests were measured and the morphological changes on inflamed paw sections were determined by HE staining. Changes in the expressions of cytokine were measured by using real-time quantitative PCR analysis and ELISA method. Immunofluorescence and western blotting were used to detect the microglia activation and MAPK. Aprepitant treatment significantly inhibited the excitability of DRG neurons. The pain behavior and the paw tissues inflammatory damage were significantly relived after the administration of aprepitant compared to formalin group. Aprepitant significantly suppressed the activation of microglia, phosphorylation of JNK and p38 MAPK, as well as the mRNA and protein expressions of MCP-1, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β, and . The LPS-induced over-translocation into nucleus of NF-κBp65 was down-regulated following aprepitant treatment in BV-2 cells. The present study suggests that aprepitant attenuates inflammatory pain in mice via suppressing the phosphorylation of JNK and p38, and inhibiting the NF-κB signaling pathway.
PubMed: 35087409
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.811584 -
American Journal of Respiratory and... Mar 2021
Topics: Antitussive Agents; Aprepitant; Cough; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Receptors, Neurokinin-1
PubMed: 33108214
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202010-3783ED -
Cancers Aug 2019Hepatoblastoma (HB) is the most common malignant liver tumor that occurs during childhood. The prognosis of children with HB is favorable when a complete surgical... (Review)
Review
Hepatoblastoma (HB) is the most common malignant liver tumor that occurs during childhood. The prognosis of children with HB is favorable when a complete surgical resection of the tumor is possible, but for high-risk patients, the prognosis is much worse. New anti-HB strategies must be urgently developed. The undecapeptide substance P (SP) after binding to the neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R), regulates cancer cell proliferation, exerts an antiapoptotic effect, induces cell migration for invasion/metastasis, and triggers endothelial cell proliferation for neoangiogenesis. HB samples and cell lines overexpress NK-1R (the truncated form) and SP elicits HB cell proliferation. One of these strategies could be the use of non-peptide NK-1R antagonists. These antagonists exert, in a concentration-dependent manner, an antiproliferative action against HB cells (inhibit cell proliferation and induce the death of HB cells by apoptosis). NK-1R antagonists exerted a dual effect in HB: Decreased both tumor volume and angiogenic activity. Thus, the SP/NK-1R system is an important target in the HB treatment and NK-1R antagonists could act as specific drugs against HB cells. In this review, we update and discuss the use of NK-1R antagonists in the treatment of HB.
PubMed: 31466222
DOI: 10.3390/cancers11091258