Naloxegol 25mg tablets

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a pervasive and distressing side effect of chronic opioid therapy in patients with cancer pain, significantly impacting their quality of life. Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAS) were developed for treatment-resistant OIC but most studies were conducted with non-cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: to discuss two oral formulations of PAMORAs, naldemedine and naloxegol, and to review available evidence of the effectiveness of these drugs for OIC in cancer patients. METHODS: a comprehensive search to identify primary literature for either naldemedine or naloxegol for OIC in cancer patients. RESULTS: Only three prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials for naldemedine enrolling cancer patients were identified; the results of a subgroup analysis of two of those studies and two non-interventional post marketing surveillance studies of these trials are also reported here. For naloxegol, only two randomized controlled trials were identified; both were unsuccessful in enrolling sufficient patients. An additional four prospective non-interventional observational studies with naloxegol were found that enrolled cancer patients. There were significantly higher rates of responders in the PAMORA groups than in the placebo groups. The most common side effect for both PAMORAs was diarrhea. LIMITATIONS: All studies were industry-funded, and given that only three trials were randomized controlled studies, the overall quality of the studies was lacking. CONCLUSION: Naldemedine or naloxegol appeared safe and useful in the treatment of OIC in cancer patients and may improve their quality of life. Larger-scale randomized placebo-controlled studies of PAMORAs in cancer patients would strengthen existing evidence.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Daily use of opioid analgesics has significantly increased in recent years due to an increasing prevalence of conditions associated with chronic pain. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the most common, under-recognized, and under-treated side effects of opioid analgesics. OIC significantly reduces the quality of life by causing psychological distress, lowering work productivity, and increasing access to healthcare facilities. The economic and social burden of OIC led to the development of precise strategies for daily clinical practice. Key aspects are the prevention of constipation through adequate water intake and fiber support, avoidance of sedentariness, and early recognition and treatment of cofactors that could worsen constipation. Recommended first-line therapy includes osmotic (preferably polyethylene glycol) and stimulant laxatives. Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists, such as methylnaltrexone, naloxegol, or naldemedine, should be used in patients that have not responded to the first-line treatments. The bowel functional index is the main tool for assessing the severity of OIC and for monitoring the response. The paper discusses the recent literature on the pathophysiology, clinical evaluation, and management of OIC and provides a pragmatic approach for its assessment and treatment.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

Background Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) has become more common in the intensive care unit (ICU) due to increased opioid utilization. Traditional laxatives often prove ineffective against OIC, leading to the increased utilization of naloxegol. However, further research is needed to confirm naloxegol's effectiveness and safety in critical care. This study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of this intervention in critically ill OIC patients. Methods A single-center retrospective study was conducted on 353 patients who received one or more doses of naloxegol from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020, for OIC at a tertiary care center. The primary endpoint of this study was to evaluate serious adverse events such as reduced analgesic effect, gastrointestinal perforation, seizure, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or ventricular arrhythmias using Naranjo Scale in critically ill patients. The secondary goal was to assess the efficacy of naloxegol, measured by the time of the first bowel movement. Results The average duration of naloxegol use was three days, with the first bowel movement occurring at an average of 11.3 hours. Furthermore, 59.8% of individuals had their first bowel movement within 20 hours of receiving naloxegol. There was a low level of causality between naloxegol use and adverse events such as gastrointestinal perforation, seizures, AMI, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and ventricular arrhythmia. Additionally, reduction in analgesia showed no strong relationship with naloxegol use indicated by the Naranjo Scale assessment. Conclusion Naloxegol showed promising safety and efficacy profiles in treating OIC amongst critically ill patients, though our findings require further validation through prospective studies. This research paves the way for further investigation into naloxegol's role in OIC management, emphasizing the necessity of personalized treatment strategies in critical care settings.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Patients receiving opioid analgesics may experience constipation [ie, opioid-induced constipation (OIC)], require treatment to induce laxation, and may be at risk for gastrointestinal perforation, an uncommon but potentially life-threatening condition. Management of OIC includes treatment with over-the-counter laxatives and peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs; methylnaltrexone, naloxegol, naldemedine). In patients receiving treatment for OIC, gastrointestinal perforation may result from the laxation process, causing disruption of the gastrointestinal lining that may already have compromised integrity. A PubMed literature review and a search of the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database identified several cases of gastrointestinal perforation (life-threatening or with mortality) across the range of agents administered for the treatment of OIC or other constipation types. Methylnaltrexone in the subcutaneous form was the first PAMORA approved for OIC. Its real-world use in the ∼6 years before the availability of another OIC-indicated PAMORA helped establish the adverse-event profile of the class, and experience has been gained in identifying and treating appropriate patient populations. Class labeling of PAMORAs includes a contraindication in patients with known or suspected gastrointestinal obstruction or increased risk of recurrent obstruction. Appropriate patient selection during laxation therapy for OIC, regardless of treatment plan, involves consideration of the overall risk versus benefit in patients at increased risk of perforation due to comorbid medical conditions, concurrent medications, or recent gastrointestinal procedures. After initiating treatment for OIC, clinicians should assess the effectiveness of laxation therapy and carefully monitor for signs of gastrointestinal perforation.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Objective: This study evaluates the onset, magnitude, and consistency of improvement of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) symptoms with naloxegol treatment. Methods: This was a pooled analysis of two Phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies (KODIAC-04/05, NCT01309841/NCT01323790) in patients with chronic non-cancer pain and OIC treated with naloxegol 25mg or 12.5mg daily. This analysis assessed improvements in response rates, frequency of spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) and complete SBMs (CSBM), OIC constipation symptoms (straining, stool consistency), time to first post-dose SBM and CSBM, and onset of adverse events over the 12-week period. Subjects: The population of 1337 subjects had a mean age of 52 years and mean duration of opioid use of 3.6 years at baseline. Mean SBM frequency was 1.4/week. Results: Naloxegol 25mg and 12.5mg demonstrated significantly higher response rates vs placebo (PBO) [41.9% (P < 0.001), 37.8% (P = 0.008), 29.4% respectively]. Rapid (within 1 week) and sustained (over 12 weeks) symptom improvement was significantly greater for naloxegol vs PBO (P < 0.05). Both doses showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in straining, stool consistency, number of SBMs and CSBMs/wk. Significantly shorter times to first post-dose SBM and CSBM were observed with naloxegol vs PBO (SBM HR: 25mg = 1.90, 12.5mg= 1.60; CSBM HR: 25mg = 1.42, 12.5mg = 1.36; P < 0.001 for each regimen). Adverse events occurred more frequently in the naloxegol 25mg group and were most frequently reported during the first week. Conclusion: In patients with chronic non-cancer pain, naloxegol 25mg and 12.5mg demonstrated significantly higher response rates and rapid and sustained improvements in OIC symptoms compared with PBO.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the NALOPOOL project was to assess the efficacy and safety of naloxegol in patients with cancer pain who exhibited opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and were treated under real-world conditions. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from three multicenter observational studies conducted with naloxegol in patients with cancer who exhibited OIC and were prescribed naloxegol under real-world conditions. Efficacy outcomes were evaluated after 4 weeks of treatment. All analyses were performed via a visit-wise approach. Heterogeneity was assessed via Cochran's Q-test or Levene's test. RESULTS: Spontaneous bowel movements (SBM) response (≥3 SBM per week and an increase of ≥1 from baseline; three studies) was reported in 223 of 314 evaluable patients (71%, 95% CI 66-76); clinically relevant improvement in the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (>0.5 points; three studies) occurred in 179 of 299 evaluable patients (60%, 95% CI 56-74) and in the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (>0.5 points; two studies) was reported in 131 of 190 evaluable patients (69%, 95% CI 62-76); and clinically relevant improvement in the Bowel Function Index (score ≥ 12 points at the endpoint; two studies;) was reported in 133 of 195 evaluable patients (68%, 95% CI 62-75). No significant heterogeneity was found for any efficacy outcome. The pooled proportion of patients who discontinued the drug owing to adverse reactions was 6.1% (95% CI 3.8% to 8.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of naloxegol for the management of OIC in patients with cancer pain who do not respond to laxative treatment.

Abstract licence: CC BY