Olanzapine for the relief of nausea in patients with advanced cancer and incomplete bowel obstruction

Review of Dopamine Antagonists for Nausea and Vomiting in Palliative Care Patients

Symptoms of nausea and vomiting are common in palliative care and hospice patients. One of the many classes of medications used for the treatment of nausea and vomiting is dopamine receptor antagonists which are particularly helpful for treating nausea mediated by the chemoreceptor trigger zone (CTZ) and impaired gastrointestinal function. While dopamine antagonists can be very effective treatments for nausea they should be used with caution as they carry the risk of QTc prolongation, have a FDA black box warning for tardive dyskinesia (TD), and increased risk of precipitating psychosis and death in patients with dementia. This review will cover haloperidol, olanzapine, prochlorperazine, and metoclopramide for treatment of nausea and vomiting including evidence of efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics to improve safe and effective utilization in clinical practice. This includes medication receptor site affinities at histaminic, muscarinic, serotonergic, and alpha-adrenergic receptors which can help providers anticipate potential adverse effects and risk of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), TD, and QTc prolongation. This review also includes considerations for dose adjustments based on renal function, hepatic function, and age. Understanding the pharmacology of dopamine antagonists can help providers choose the best treatment for control of nausea and vomiting and subsequently improve patients' quality of life.

MASCC multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for the management of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced cancer

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) for patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) MBO study group conducted a systematic review of databases (inception to March 2021) to identify studies about patients with advanced cancer and MBO that reported on the following outcomes: symptom management, bowel obstruction resolution, prognosis, overall survival, and quality of life. The review was restricted to studies published in English, but no restrictions were placed on publication year, country, and study type. As per the MASCC Guidelines Policy, the findings were synthesized to determine the levels of evidence to support each MBO intervention and, ultimately, the graded recommendations and suggestions.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 17,656 published studies and 397 selected for the guidelines. The MASCC study group developed a total of 25 evidence-based suggestions and recommendations about the management of MBO-related nausea and vomiting, bowel movements, pain, inflammation, bowel decompression, and nutrition. Expert consensus-based guidance about advanced care planning and psychosocial support is also provided.

CONCLUSION

This MASCC Guideline provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations about MBO management for patients with advanced cancer.

Patient-perceived symptomatic benefits of olanzapine treatment for nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced cancer who received palliative care through consultation teams: a multicenter prospective observational study

PURPOSE

To examine the safety, effectiveness, and patient-perceived benefit of treatment with olanzapine for nausea and vomiting (N/V) in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective observational study in a tertiary care setting (Trial registration number: UMIN000020493, date of registration: 2016/1/12). We measured the following: average nausea in the last 24 h using a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS: range 0-10) at baseline and day 2, patient-perceived treatment benefit (based on a 5-point verbal scale), and adverse events (AEs; using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4).

RESULTS

The 85 participants (45% men) had a mean age of 58.7±15.8 years. Major causes of N/V were opioids (44%) and chemotherapy (34%). All patients received a daily dose of olanzapine of 5 mg or less as first-line treatment (N=35) or second- or later-line treatment (N=50). Nausea NRS decreased from 6.1±2.2 to 1.8±2.0 (differences: -4.3, 95% CI -3.7 to -4.9, p<0.001). The proportion of patients who did not experience vomiting episodes in the last 24 h increased from 40-89%. Mean decrease in nausea NRS by patient-perceived treatment benefit were as follows: -0.8 for "none" (n=4, 5%); -2.8 for "slight" (n=17, 20%); -3.3 for "moderate" (n=14, 16%); -4.7 for "lots" (n=25, 29%); and -6.1 for "complete" (n=25, 29%; p-for-trend<0.001). The most prevalent AE was somnolence (n=15, 18%).

CONCLUSION

Short-term and relatively low-dose olanzapine treatment was effective for multifactorial N/V. Confirmatory studies with longer observation periods are needed to clarify the duration of the effect and adverse events.

Olanzapine for the Treatment of Advanced Cancer-Related Chronic Nausea and/or Vomiting: A Randomized Pilot Trial

Importance

Nausea and vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, can be substantial symptoms in patients with advanced cancer.

Objective

To evaluate the utility of olanzapine for treating chronic nausea/vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, in patients with advanced cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This study is a double-line, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted from July 2017 through April 2019, with analysis conducted in 2019. Eligible participants were outpatients with advanced cancer who had persistent nausea/vomiting without having had chemotherapy or radiotherapy in the prior 14 days. Chronic nausea was present for at least 1 week (worst daily nausea numeric rating scores needed to be greater than 3 on a 0-10 scale).

Interventions

Patients received olanzapine (5 mg) or a placebo, orally, daily for 7 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patient-reported outcomes were used for study end points. Data were collected at baseline and daily for 7 more days. The primary study end point (the change in nausea numeric rating scores from baseline to the last treatment day) and the study hypothesis were both identified prior to data collection.

Results

A total of 30 patients (15 per arm) were enrolled; these included 16 women and 14 men who had a mean (range) age of 63 (39-79) years. Baseline median nausea scores, in all patients, were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10). After 1 day and 1 week, the median nausea scores in the placebo arm were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10) on both days, compared with the olanzapine arm scores of 2 out of 10 (range, 2-3) after day 1 and 1 out of 10 (range, 0-3) after 1 week. After 1 week of treatment, the reduction in nausea scores in the olanzapine arm was 8 points (95% CI, 7-8) higher than that of the placebo arm. The primary 2-sided end point P value was <.001. Correspondingly, patients in the olanzapine arm reported less emesis, less use of other antiemetic drugs, better appetite, less sedation, less fatigue, and better well-being. One patient, on the placebo, stopped treatment early owing to lack of perceived benefit. No patients receiving olanzapine reported excess sedation or any other adverse event.

Conclusions and Relevance

Olanzapine, at 5 mg/d, appeared to be effective in controlling nausea and emesis and in improving other symptoms and quality-of-life parameters in the study population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03137121.

The Management of Nausea and Vomiting Not Related to Anticancer Therapy in Patients with Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

In cancer patients, the management of nausea and vomiting that is not directly related to treatment is challenging. Much current practice is based on expert opinion and anecdote. Fortunately, over recent years, a number of quality trials have been undertaken to strengthen the evidence base that guides the care of our patients with these distressing symptoms. Much is still unknown however. In this article, we present the latest literature that addresses some of the outstanding issues.

Medical Management of Inoperable Malignant Bowel Obstruction

OBJECTIVE

To review medical management of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review using PubMed and MEDLINE databases searching malignant bowel obstruction, etiology, types, pathophysiology, medical, antisecretory, anti-inflammatory, antiemetic drugs, analgesics, promotion of emptying, prevention of infection, anticholinergics, somatostatin analogs, gastric antisecretory drugs, prokinetic agents, glucocorticoid, opioid analgesics, antibiotics, enema, and adverse effects.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Randomized or observational studies, cohorts, case reports, or reviews written in English between 1983 and November 2020 were evaluated.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) commonly occurs in patients with advanced or recurrent malignancies and severely affects the quality of life and survival of patients. Its management remains complex and variable. Medical management is the cornerstone of MBO treatment, with the goal of reducing distressing symptoms and optimizing quality of life. Until now, there has been neither a standard clinical approach nor registered medications to treat patients with inoperable MBO.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

This review provides information on the etiology, type and pathophysiology, and medical treatment of MBO and related adverse reactions of the drugs commonly used, which can greatly assist clinicians in making clinical decisions when treating MBO.

CONCLUSIONS

Published research shows that medical management of MBO mainly consists of antisecretory, anti-inflammatory strategies, controlling vomiting and pain, promoting emptying, preventing infection, and combination therapy. Being knowledgeable about the most current treatment options, the related adverse effects, and the evidence supporting different practices is critical for clinicians to provide individualized medical therapy for MBO patients.

The Benefits of Olanzapine in Palliating Symptoms

OPINION STATEMENT

Olanzapine has become a major drug in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting as a prophylactic agent. In addition, a recent randomized trial has demonstrated its benefits in treating nausea and vomiting associated with advanced cancer. The added benefit to olanzapine is that it also stimulates appetite. As a result, since it treats multiple symptoms associated with advanced cancer, it is likely to become the antiemetic of choice in palliative care at least in the USA. The added benefit of treating insomnia and the avoidance of benzodiazepines should place olanzapine in at the top of the list of drugs to use for patients who do complain of insomnia. There is no good evidence that it potentiates the respiratory depression of opioids unlike benzodiazepines. The evidence is weak that olanzapine in as an adjuvant analgesic. Hopefully, future trials will explore this in greater depth. The benefits of adding olanzapine to potent opioids are that it may reduce craving, drug cues, and opioid misuse. Other symptoms like anxiety and depression may be addressed by the addition of olanzapine to standard antidepressants.

The use of olanzapine as an antiemetic in palliative medicine: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic that has affinity for many central nervous system receptors. Its efficacy is supported by several studies in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. No recommendations exist on the antiemetic use of olanzapine in the palliative care setting. The aim of this work is to complete the initial work of Fonte et al. published in 2015, to determine whether the literature supports the use of olanzapine as an antiemetic in palliative situations and, in practice, to propose a therapeutic schema adapted to the palliative setting.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA criteria. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, RefDoc, EMBase databases and the gray literature databases. The bibliographic search was conducted between November 2016 and August 2017.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles were included: 2 case studies, 3 case series, 3 retrospective studies, 2 prospective studies, 2 literature reviews. All studies concluded on the efficacy of olanzapine as an antiemetic in the palliative care setting. No serious adverse effects were reported. Based on the data from the literature review, we propose a therapeutic scheme adapted to the palliative care context.

CONCLUSION

Action of olanzapine on many receptors and its tolerance profile make it an interesting antiemetic treatment in palliative medicine. But to date, studies are scarce and have a low statistical power. Further investigation is therefore needed to determine the benefit of this treatment in palliative care patients, compared to usual treatments.

The Palliative Care of Patients With Incurable Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of palliative medicine is to optimize the quality of life of patients with incurable, progressive diseases. The care delivered in actual clinical practice is not uniform and often takes insufficient account of the currently available scientific evidence.

METHODS

In accordance with the methodological directives on systematic literature reviews and consensus-finding that have been issued by the German Oncology Guideline Program (Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie), a nationwide, representative group of experts updated the previously published seven chapters of the S3 (evidence-based and consensus-based) guideline and formulated new recommen- dations on a further eight topics in palliative care.

RESULTS

Non-drug options for the treatment of fatigue include aerobic exercise and psycho-educative methods, particularly cognitive behavioral therapy. Sleep distur- bances can be treated with improved sleep hygiene and relaxation techniques, as well as with drugs: Z substances for short-term and sedating antidepressants for intermediate-term treatment. For nausea and vomiting, the first line of treatment consists of antidopaminergic drugs, such as haloperidol, or drugs with an antido- paminergic effect combined with a further receptor affinity, such as metoclopramide. For patients suffering from malignant intestinal obstruction (MIO), an important con- sideration for further treatment is whether the obstruction is complete or incomplete. Psychotherapeutic interventions are indicated for the treatment of anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Multiple studies have confirmed the benefit of the early integration of palliative care for achieving the goals of better symptom control and maintenance of derate quality of evidence supporting the management of certain symptoms in patients with incurable cancers.

Nausea and Vomiting in Advanced Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Nausea and vomiting is a common clinical issue in the advanced cancer patient. The etiology may be related to treatment (chemotherapy, radiation, surgery) or non-treatment clinical issues related to the advanced cancer. A very detailed initial assessment of nausea/vomiting is indicated including frequency, duration, intensity, associated activities, and the presence of anorexia or cachexia and is necessary in order to determine a specific etiology which may allow a potentially specific successful intervention. Various international antiemetic guidelines have been developed for the successful prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and emesis but the treatment of post-chemotherapy nausea/vomiting and of radiation-induced nausea/vomiting has been less successful. Chronic nausea/vomiting in the advanced cancer patient unrelated to treatment remains a significant clinical problem with few successful treatments and interventions. NCCN and ASCO palliative care guidelines provide various treatment suggestions but these are based on empiric evidence with very few clinical trials available to provide demonstrated effective treatments. Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that olanzapine may be an effective agent for the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis as well as treatment of chronic nausea and vomiting unrelated to treatment.

Nausea and Vomiting: a Palliative Care Imperative

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review was undertaken to survey recent literature for research reports and comprehensive clinical reviews addressing the pharmacologic management of nausea and vomiting (N&V) in advanced cancer. The goal was to integrate findings in a comprehensive article that incorporates palliative care concepts into antiemetic treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are few published studies of N&V in advanced cancer; such research may be limited by the multicausal nature of N&V and participant burden to patients with life-limiting disease. Most articles are written by oncologists who also specialize in palliative care, and those addressing adverse effects of drugs used as antiemetics are found in other literature. Articles addressing more novel therapies, like cannabinoids and medical marijuana, are uncommon in the oncology literature. N&V in patients with progressive or advanced cancer is often multicausal. Nausea is more common and persistent, and even mild nausea is bothersome and may cause anxiety or depression. The mechanisms of nausea and vomiting overlap, but different neural pathways constitute the final pathway for each-the brainstem for vomiting and higher brain regions for nausea. Common causes of N&V in advanced cancer include constipation, opioids, and malignant bowel obstruction. About 40% have undetermined causes and may be exacerbated by impaired gastric emptying, chemical imbalances, or other factors. Several drugs that have antiemetic effects and act at different receptors are used to palliate N&V. There is a paucity of research that supports palliative antiemetic choices, and other research is needed to define potential therapeutic strategies that capitalize on differences between nausea and vomiting.

Adult Cancer Pain, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

In recent years, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain have undergone substantial revisions focusing on the appropriate and safe prescription of opioid analgesics, optimization of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvant medications, and integration of nonpharmacologic methods of cancer pain management. This selection highlights some of these changes, covering topics on management of adult cancer pain including pharmacologic interventions, nonpharmacologic interventions, and treatment of specific cancer pain syndromes. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional aspects of this topic, including pathophysiologic classification of cancer pain syndromes, comprehensive pain assessment, management of pain crisis, ongoing care for cancer pain, pain in cancer survivors, and specialty consultations.

Low-dose of olanzapine has ameliorating effects on cancer-related anorexia

Background

Olanzapine (OLZ) has become well-known for its antiemetic effects on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. However, it remains unclear whether OLZ also has efficacy for treating cancer-related anorexia. This study, therefore, retrospectively examined whether or not OLZ administration affects the food intake in anorexic cancer patients who exhibit neither nausea nor vomiting.

Methods

Eighty patients prescribed OLZ were extracted from 951 inpatients who consulted with our palliative care team at Chiba University Hospital from April 2008 to March 2016. Their food intake described on a nursing record was compared before and after OLZ administration. The observation period was 3 days before and after the start of OLZ treatment, because most inpatients whose food intake increased were discharged in 3 days.

Results

In those 80 patients, the average dose of OLZ for 3 days was 2.28±0.87 (mean±SD) mg/day. First, the food intake in 80 patients was significantly higher after than before starting OLZ, and the relative change in food intake was 149% on average (P<0.0001, Student’s paired t-test). Second, OLZ increased the food intake even in 40 out of 80 patients without nausea or vomiting, and the relative change in food intake was 143% on average (P<0.001, Student’s paired t-test). Third, the average food intake increased in 13 out of 40 patients who were prescribed 1.5 mg/day of OLZ, and the relative change in food intake was 124% on average (P<0.01, Student’s paired t-test). There was no significant difference in food intake between a dose of 1.5 mg/day and a dose of >1.5 mg/day of OLZ (P=0.18, Welch’s unpaired t-test).

Conclusion

We have herein reported OLZ’s ameliorating efficacy in cancer-related anorexia at the low dose of 1.5 mg/day. Although our study has many limitations, low-dose OLZ can be a promising treatment for cancer-related anorexia.

The Management of Nausea at the End of Life

The evaluation and management of nausea in patients near the end of life can be more challenging than that of nausea in patients undergoing antineoplastic therapies. Unlike in the oncology setting in which nausea is primarily managed using antiemetic regimens that have been developed with the neuropharmacology and emetogenic potentials of chemotherapy agents in mind, many patients receiving end-of-life care have nausea of multifactorial etiology. Patients also may be older with reduced physiologic ability to metabolize and clear drugs. Therefore, typical antiemetics in regimens initially selected for oncology patients may be ineffective. In this article, the prevalence, manifestation, and pathophysiology of nausea experienced by patients near and at the end of life will be reviewed, with a focus on pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions that have been found to effectively manage this symptom in this patient population.

Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Cancer: Practical Considerations for the Management of Patients with Nausea or Vomiting

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have proven efficacy and safety and are approved for use in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic events in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and those with atrial fibrillation (AF). There is no clear guidance on the use of DOACs in the significant proportion of these patients who have or will develop concomitant cancer. The occurrence of nausea and vomiting in these patients, despite implementation of guideline-recommended antiemetic strategies, is a particular concern because it may affect oral drug intake and consequently outcomes with anticoagulation therapy.Here, we review recent data on the incidence and management of cancer-associated nausea and vomiting and the current evidence and guidance relating to the use of DOACs in patients with cancer. On the basis of this evidence, an international working group of experts in the fields of cancer-associated thrombosis/hemostasis, hematology, and oncology discussed key issues related to the use of DOACs in patients with VTE or AF and cancer who are at risk of nausea and vomiting and developed some consensus recommendations. We present these consensus recommendations, which outline strategies for the use and management of anticoagulants, including DOACs, in patients with VTE or AF and cancer for whom oral drug intake may pose challenges. Guidance is provided on managing patients with gastrointestinal obstruction or nausea and vomiting that is caused by cancer treatments or other cancer-related factors.The recommendations outlined in this review provide a useful reference for health care professionals and will help to improve the management of anticoagulation in patients with VTE or AF and cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) offer several advantages over traditional anticoagulants, including ease of administration and the lack of need for routine monitoring. However, the management of patients with an indication for anticoagulation and concomitant cancer, who are at high risk of thromboembolic events, presents several challenges for administering oral therapies, particularly with regard to the risk of nausea and vomiting. In the absence of robust data from randomized trials and specific guidelines, consensus recommendations were developed for healthcare professionals regarding the use of DOACs in patients with cancer, with a focus on the management of patients who are at risk of nausea and vomiting.

Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Advanced Gynecologic Cancers: An Updated Review from a Multidisciplinary Perspective

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a major complication in women with advanced gynecologic cancers which imposes a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems. Symptoms of MBO are challenging to palliate and result in progressive decompensation of already vulnerable patients with limited therapeutic options and a short prognosis. However, there is a paucity of guidelines or innovative approaches to improve the care of women who develop MBO. MBO is a complex clinical situation that requires a multidisciplinary approach to ensure the appropriate treatment modality and interprofessional care to optimally manage these patients. This review summarizes the current literature on the different approaches targeting MBO management including surgical intervention, chemotherapy, total parenteral nutrition, and pharmacological treatment. In addition, the impact of MBO management on patients' quality of life (QOL) is examined. This article focuses on the challenges in developing evidence-based treatment guidelines for MBO and barriers in clinical trial design for MBO and proposes strategies to advance the MBO management. Collaboration is essential to design studies that may improve the overall care and quality of life for these patients. Prospective data are needed to inform clinical practice, establish a new benchmark for evidence-based MBO management, and better understand the biology of MBO.

Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction Associated With GI Cancers

For many patients with GI malignancies, the seeding of the abdominal cavity with tumor cells, called peritoneal carcinomatosis, is a common mode of metastases and disease progression. Prognosis for patients with this aspect of their disease remains poor, with high disease-related morbidity and complications. Uniform and proven practices that provide optimal palliative care and quality of life for these patients are needed. The objective of this review is to critically assess the current literature regarding palliative strategies in the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis and associated symptoms in patients with advanced GI cancers. Despite encouraging results in the select population where cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy are indicated, the majority of patients who develop peritoneal carcinomatosis in the setting of GI cancers have poor prognosis, with malignant bowel obstruction representing a common terminal phase of their disease process. For all patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, aggressive symptom control and early multimodality palliative care as further outlined should be sought.

Olanzapine in the treatment of refractory nausea and vomiting: a case report and review of the literature

The role of olanzapine in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is supported from randomized controlled trials and national consensus guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. In contrast, the role of olanzapine in refractory non-CINV is limited to case reports/series, retrospective studies, one pilot study, and one randomized controlled trial in patients with major depressive disorder. We present a case of a 36-year-old man with dyskeratosis congenita and refractory non-CINV over several years in which low-dose olanzapine was effective and tolerable. We aim to contribute to the growing evidence supporting the use of olanzapine for refractory non-CINV. Furthermore, we review and summarize the literature regarding olanzapine in the CINV and non-CINV settings.

A review of olanzapine as an antiemetic in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and in palliative care patients

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic agent that blocks multiple neuronal receptors involved in the nausea and vomiting pathways. It has therefore been studied for the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced emesis and in patients in palliative care presenting nausea and vomiting refractory to standard antiemetics. Some studies have shown that olanzapine was not inferior to aprepitant in the prophylaxis of highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and that it increased the rate of complete response when added to a combination of a 5-HT3 antagonist, aprepitant and dexamethasone. These studies present so many shortcomings, however, that they do not permit us to draw any firm conclusions. Oral olanzapine showed superior antiemetic efficacy to metoclopramide as rescue treatment to control breakthrough emesis induced by chemotherapy. However, an oral formulation is not appropriate because in patients with vomiting or severe nausea the mere ingestion of an oral drug could induce emesis. Finally, in palliative care olanzapine could control or reduce the intensity of nausea and vomiting refractory to standard antiemetics.

Symptomatic management for gastroparesis: antiemetics, analgesics, and symptom modulators

Although prokinetic agents typically are used for gastroparesis, antiemetic, analgesic, and neuromodulatory medications may help manage nausea, vomiting, pain, or discomfort. Antiemetic benefits are supported by few case reports. An open series reported symptom reductions with transdermal granisetron in gastroparesis. Opiates are not advocated in gastroparesis because they worsen nausea and delay emptying. Neuromodulators have theoretical utility, but the tricyclic agent nortriptyline showed no benefits over placebo in an idiopathic gastroparesis study raising doubts about this strategy. Neurologic and cardiac toxicities of these medications are recognized. Additional controlled study is warranted to define antiemetic, analgesic, and neuromodulator usefulness in gastroparesis.

Effects of low-dose olanzapine on duloxetine-related nausea and vomiting for the treatment of major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the effects of low-dose olanzapine on preventing occurrence and controlling the severity of nausea and vomiting related to duloxetine in treating major depressive disorder.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-eight subjects with major depressive disorder were divided into control and trial groups. The control group had 165 subjects and was treated with duloxetine only, whereas the trial group had 103 subjects and received duloxetine combined with low-dose olanzapine. After the treatment for 2 weeks, both groups were evaluated for occurrence and severity of adverse effects on digestive tract using the Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale.

RESULTS

The trial group, scored at 13, showed significantly less occurrence and severity of nausea and vomiting than the control group, scored at 38 (P < 0.05). The occurrence of nausea and vomiting in the trial group is significantly lower compared with that in the control group, and the occurrence decreases as the dose of olanzapine increases (P < 0.05). The antiemetic effect of olanzapine is valid to all subjects who received it.

CONCLUSIONS

Duloxetine combined with low-dose olanzapine can effectively reduce the occurrence and severity of duloxetine-related nausea and vomiting. With the increase of olanzapine dose, the antiemetic effect becomes stronger. Olanzapine is a safe and efficient drug for the prevention of duloxetine-related nausea and vomiting.

Olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Newer drugs incorporated in prophylactic regimens for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) have resulted in significantly reduced rates of this feared complication of cytotoxic chemotherapy. However, both delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and breakthrough CINV remain difficult areas of management and require novel treatment strategies. Recent randomized trial evidence has suggested that olanzapine, an atypical antipsychotic, may have a role in both the prevention and treatment of CINV. A systematic review was conducted to assess the efficacy of olanzapine in (a) preventing CINV in highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and (b) the treatment of breakthrough CINV. The toxicity of olanzapine in this setting was also reviewed.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases were searched to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating olanzapine in patients receiving chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 488 patients from three trials of CINV prophylaxis and 323 patients from three trials of breakthrough CINV were included. Regimens including olanzapine were associated with significant improvements in CINV prevention with both HEC and MEC. Single agent olanzapine for breakthrough nausea was superior to standard alternative options.

CONCLUSION

Data from RCTs support the use of an olanzapine containing combination regimen as an option for CINV prophylaxis and single agent olanzapine for the treatment of breakthrough CINV. In the included trials, the short duration of olanzapine appears safe and well tolerated.

Olanzapine is effective for refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting irrespective of chemotherapy emetogenicity

PURPOSE

The role of olanzapine added to a dopamine antagonist and benzodiazepine for the treatment of refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is incompletely characterized in all levels of chemotherapy emetogenicity. This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of the addition of olanzapine in adults experiencing refractory CINV stratified by chemotherapy emetogenicity.

METHODS

Thirty-three adults who experienced CINV refractory to guideline-recommended prophylaxis and breakthrough antiemetics (dopamine antagonists and benzodiazepines) and received at least one dose of olanzapine 5-10 mg per os were evaluated. Failure was defined as >5 emesis events in 24 h or more than 10 cumulative doses of rescue antiemetics following first olanzapine dose per treatment cycle. Post hoc analyses investigated variables impacting olanzapine efficacy.

RESULTS

The addition of olanzapine demonstrated an overall success rate of 70 %. This success rate did not differ between chemotherapy regimens of high versus low-to-moderate emetogenicity (p = 0.79), prophylaxis with serotonin antagonist plus corticosteroid and aprepitant versus serotonin antagonist alone (p = 0.77), or age over 50 versus ≤50 years (p > 0.99). A trend toward greater benefit was seen in women (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of olanzapine to a dopamine antagonist and benzodiazepine demonstrated high efficacy rates for refractory CINV irrespective of chemotherapy emetogenicity. The high success rates among all groups suggests that incomplete resolution of CINV with prophylactic serotonin antagonists and breakthrough dopamine antagonists plus benzodiazepine may benefit from the addition of olanzapine regardless of gender, degree of chemotherapy emetogenicity, number of prophylactic antiemetics, or age. The trend toward greater control of emesis in women merits further investigation.

Olanzapine for the prevention and treatment of chronic nausea and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic agent of the thiobenzodiazepine class. It blocks multiple neurotransmitter receptors including dopaminergic at D1, D2, D3, D4 brain receptors, serotonergic at 5-HT2a, 5-HT2c, 5-HT3, 5-HT6 receptors, catecholamines at alpha1 adrenergic receptors, acetylcholine at muscarinic receptors, and histamine at H1 receptors. Olanzapine has five times the affinity for 5-HT2 receptors than D2 receptors and has been used to treat schizophrenia and delirium. Olanzapine's activity at multiple receptors, particularly at the D2, 5-HT2c, and 5-HT3 receptors which appear to be involved in nausea and emesis, has prompted its use in the treatment of nausea and vomiting refractory to standard antiemetics. Case reports and formal clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy in the treatment of chronic nausea, the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis, and the treatment of breakthrough chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis. Phase II and phase III clinical trials have demonstrated that there is a significant improvement in nausea when olanzapine is added to guideline directed prophylactic antiemetic agents 5-HT3 receptor antagonists and tachykinin NK1 receptor antagonists in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy Common side effects of olanzapine when used over a period of months include weight gain as well as an association with the onset of diabetes mellitus, but these effects have not been seen with short term use of daily doses of less than one week.

Psychopharmacology in psycho-oncology

Psychopharmacological intervention is a major clinical and research area in oncology and palliative care. Over the last 35 years, psychotropic drugs have been shown to have a number of important indications for the treatment of the most common psychiatric disorders, such as depression, anxiety, stress-related syndromes, severe adjustment disorders, sleep disorders and delirium, which combined affect at least 30-40% of patients with cancer and even a higher percentage of patients in an advanced phase of illness. The availability of new drugs, with less side-effects and safer pharmacological profiles, has been a major advance in clinical psycho-oncology. Interestingly, several drugs have also been found to be helpful for the adjuvant treatment of cancer-related symptoms, such as pain, hot flashes, pruritus, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, and cognitive impairment, making psychopharmacology an important tool for the improvement of cancer patients' quality of life. The aim of this paper is to summarize recent relevant data concerning the use of psychotropic drugs, namely antidepressants, anxiolytics, antipsychotics, anticonvulsants and psychostimulants in patients with cancer.