Does co-administration of a non-selective opiate antagonist enhance acceleration of transit by a 5-HT4 agonist in constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome? A randomized controlled trial

Tegaserod: What's Old Is New Again

Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are common gastrointestinal disorders imposing considerable impact on the quality of life and well-being of affected individuals. A paucity of evidence-based treatment options exist for CIC and IBS-C sufferers. Tegaserod, a 5-HT₄ agonist, has a substantial body of preclinical and clinical study evidence to support its beneficial role in modulating sensorimotor function of the luminal gastrointestinal tract. Tegaserod was first approved for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the management of IBS-C and CIC in 2002 and 2004, respectively. Tegaserod enjoyed a successful uptake in the management of these disorders during its first several years of availability in the United States, but was later withdrawn from the market in 2007 over concerns related to adverse cardiovascular events. Since then, additional safety data has been generated, and following a resubmission and review by the Food and Drug Administration, in April 2019, tegaserod was once again approved for use in IBS-C under a more restricted labeling, confining use to women under 65 years of age without heart disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors. This review summarizes the regulatory journey of tegaserod and details the existing pharmacokinetic, physiologic, clinical, and safety data of tegaserod generated over the last 2 decades. The discussion also examines the future of tegaserod in the treatment of these constipation disorders, as well as its potential role in other related disorders of brain-gut interaction.

Insights on efficacious doses of PAMORAs for patients on chronic opioid therapy or opioid-naïve patients

BACKGROUND

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a major side effect of opioid use. Centrally acting antagonists result in opioid withdrawal or worsening of pain and lead to use of peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs). The required doses of the PAMORAs, methylnaltrexone and naloxegol, in the treatment of OIC are well established in chronic opioid users. OIC may occur after short duration of opioid treatment; the required doses of naloxone, naltrexone, and PAMORAs in opioid-naïve subjects (with no opioid use for at least 3 months) are unclear. The aim of this review was to evaluate the PAMORA dose required for opioid-naïve subjects to achieve similar beneficial effects on symptoms or valid surrogates to those observed in chronic opioid users.

METHODS

A PubMed search of μ-opioid antagonists to counter μ-opioid effects included terms: naloxone, naltrexone, methylnaltrexone, alvimopan, and naloxegol, as well as OIC and colonic transit.

KEY RESULTS

The approved dose of methylnaltrexone in chronic opioid users, 0.3 mg/kg subcutaneous (SQ), did not affect motility in opioid-naïve subjects. Trials investigating the required dose of alvimopan showed 0.5-1 mg dose was efficacious in treating OIC; a 10-fold higher dose (12 mg) of alvimopan is needed to block effects of codeine on small bowel and colonic transit in opioid-naïve subjects compared to chronic opioid users. Opioid-naïve users need 125 mg of naloxegol to reverse the effects of opioids on transit; this is in contrast to the 12.5 to 25 mg needed to treat OIC in chronic opioid users.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Opioid-naïve subjects require a higher dose of PAMORA than chronic opioid users to achieve μ-opioid antagonist effect.

Low dose naltrexone for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease is a transmural, relapsing inflammatory condition afflicting the digestive tract. Opioid signalling, long known to affect secretion and motility in the gut, has been implicated in the inflammatory cascade of Crohn's disease. Low dose naltrexone, an opioid antagonist, has garnered interest as a potential therapy.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low dose naltrexone for induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register was performed from inception to 15 January 2018 to identify relevant studies. Abstracts from major gastroenterology conferences including Digestive Disease Week and United European Gastroenterology Week and reference lists from retrieved articles were also screened.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of low dose naltrexone (LDN) for treatment of active Crohn's disease were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis using Review Manager (RevMan 5.3.5). The primary outcome was induction of clinical remission defined by a Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) of < 150 or a pediatric Crohn's disease activity index (PCDAI) of < 10. Secondary outcomes included clinical response (70- or 100-point decrease in CDAI from baseline), endoscopic remission or response, quality of life, and adverse events as defined by the included studies. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome and selected secondary outcomes was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies were identified (46 participants). One study assessed the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks of LDN (4.5 mg/day) treatment compared to placebo in adult patients (N = 34). The other study assessed eight weeks of LDN (0.1 mg/kg, maximum 4.5 mg/day) treatment compared to placebo in pediatric patients (N = 12). The primary purpose of the pediatric study was to assess safety and tolerability. Both studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. The study in adult patients reported that 30% (5/18) of LDN treated patients achieved clinical remission at 12 weeks compared to 18% (3/16) of placebo patients, a difference that was not statistically significant (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.24). The study in children reported that 25% of LDN treated patients achieved clinical remission (PCDAI < 10) compared to none of the patients in the placebo group, although it was unclear if this result was for the randomized placebo-controlled trial or for the open label extension study. In the adult study 70-point clinical response rates were significantly higher in those treated with LDN than placebo. Eighty-three per cent (15/18) of LDN patients had a 70-point clinical response at week 12 compared to 38% (6/16) of placebo patients (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.32). The effect of LDN on the proportion of adult patients who achieved a 100-point clinical response was uncertain. Sixty-one per cent (11/18) of LDN patients achieved a 100-point clinical response compared to 31% (5/16) of placebo patients (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 4.42). The proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic response (CDEIS decline > 5 from baseline) was significantly higher in the LDN group compared to placebo. Seventy-two per cent (13/18) of LDN patients achieved an endoscopic response compared to 25% (4/16) of placebo patients (RR 2.89; 95% CI 1.18 to 7.08). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic remission. Endoscopic remission (CDEIS < 3) was achieved in 22% (4/18) of the LDN group compared to 0% (0/16) of the placebo group (RR 8.05; 95% CI 0.47 to 138.87). Pooled data from both studies show no statistically significant differences in withdrawals due to adverse events or specific adverse events including sleep disturbance, unusual dreams, headache, decreased appetite, nausea and fatigue. No serious adverse events were reported in either study. GRADE analyses rated the overall quality of the evidence for the primary and secondary outcomes (i.e. clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic response, and adverse events) as low due to serious imprecision (sparse data).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is insufficient evidence to allow any firm conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of LDN used to treat patients with active Crohn's disease. Data from one small study suggests that LDN may provide a benefit in terms of clinical and endoscopic response in adult patients with active Crohn's disease. Data from two small studies suggest that LDN does not increase the rate of specific adverse events relative to placebo. However, these results need to be interpreted with caution as they are based on very small numbers of patients and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low due to serious imprecision. Further randomized controlled trials are required to assess the efficacy and safety of LDN therapy in active Crohn's disease in both adults and children.

Opioidergic effects on enteric and sensory nerves in the lower GI tract: basic mechanisms and clinical implications

Opioids are one of the most prescribed drug classes for treating acute pain. However, chronic use is often associated with tolerance as well as debilitating side effects, including nausea and dependence, which are mediated by the central nervous system, as well as constipation emerging from effects on the enteric nervous system. These gastrointestinal (GI) side effects limit the usefulness of opioids in treating pain in many patients. Understanding the mechanism(s) of action of opioids on the nervous system that shows clinical benefit as well as those that have unwanted effects is critical for the improvement of opioid drugs. The opioidergic system comprises three classical receptors (μ, δ, κ) and a nonclassical receptor (nociceptin), and each of these receptors is expressed to varying extents by the enteric and intestinal extrinsic sensory afferent nerves. The purpose of this review is to discuss the role that the opioidergic system has on enteric and extrinsic afferent nerves in the lower GI tract in health and diseases of the lower GI tract, particularly inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome, and the implications of opioid treatment on clinical outcomes. Consideration is also given to emerging developments in our understanding of the immune system as a novel source of endogenous opioids and the mechanisms underlying opioid tolerance, including the potential influence of opioid receptor splice variants and heteromeric complexes.

Opioid-induced constipation: rationale for the role of norbuprenorphine in buprenorphine-treated individuals

Buprenorphine and buprenorphine–naloxone fixed combinations are effective for managing patients with opioid dependence, but constipation is one of the most common side effects. Evidence indicates that the rate of constipation is lower when patients are switched from sublingual buprenorphine–naloxone tablets or films to a bilayered bioerodible mucoadhesive buccal film formulation, and while the bilayered buccal film promotes unidirectional drug flow across the buccal mucosa, the mechanism for the reduced constipation is unclear. Pharmacokinetic simulations indicate that chronic dosing of sublingually administered buprenorphine may expose patients to higher concentrations of norbuprenorphine than buprenorphine, while chronic dosing of the buccal formulation results in higher buprenorphine concentrations than norbuprenorphine. Because norbuprenorphine is a potent full agonist at mu-opioid receptors, the differences in norbuprenorphine exposure may explain the observed differences in treatment-emergent constipation between the sublingual formulation and the buccal film formulation of buprenorphine–naloxone. To facilitate the understanding and management of opioid-dependent patients at risk of developing opioid-induced constipation, the clinical profiles of these formulations of buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone are summarized, and the incidence of treatment-emergent constipation in clinical trials is reviewed. These data are used to propose a potential role for exposure to norbuprenorphine, an active metabolite of buprenorphine, in the pathophysiology of opioid-induced constipation.

Low dose naltrexone for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease is a transmural, relapsing inflammatory condition afflicting the digestive tract. Opioid signalling, long known to affect secretion and motility in the gut, has been implicated in the inflammatory cascade of Crohn's disease. Low dose naltrexone, an opioid antagonist, has garnered interest as a potential therapy.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low dose naltrexone for induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Functional Bowel Disorders Review Group Specialized Register was performed from inception to February 2013 to identify relevant studies. Abstracts from major gastroenterology conferences including Digestive Disease Week and United European Gastroenterology Week and reference lists from retrieved articles were also reviewed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of low dose naltrexone (LDN) for treatment of active Crohn's disease were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis using Review Manager (RevMan 5.2). The primary outcome was induction of clinical remission defined by a Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) of < 150 or a pediatric Crohn's disease activity index (PCDAI) of < 10. Secondary outcomes included clinical response (70- or 100-point decrease in CDAI from baseline), endoscopic remission or response, quality of life, and adverse events as defined by the included studies. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome and selected secondary outcomes was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies were identified (46 participants). One study assessed the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks of LDN (4.5 mg/day) treatment compared to placebo in adult patients (N = 34). The other study assessed eight weeks of LDN (0.1 mg/kg, maximum 4.5 mg/day) treatment compared to placebo in pediatric patients (N = 12). The primary purpose of the pediatric study was to assess safety and tolerability. Both studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. The study in adult patients reported that 30% (5/18) of LDN treated patients achieved clinical remission at 12 weeks compared to 18% (3/16) of placebo patients, a difference that was not statistically significant (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.24). The study in children reported that 25% of LDN treated patients achieved clinical remission (PCDAI < 10) compared to none of the patients in the placebo group, although it was unclear if this result was for the randomized placebo-controlled trial or for the open label extension study. In the adult study 70-point clinical response rates were significantly higher in those treated with LDN than placebo. Eighty-three per cent (15/18) of LDN patients had a 70-point clinical response at week 12 compared to 38% (6/16) of placebo patients (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.32). The effect of LDN on the proportion of adult patients who achieved a 100-point clinical response was uncertain. Sixty-one per cent (11/18) of LDN patients achieved a 100-point clinical response compared to 31% (5/16) of placebo patients (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 4.42). The proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic response (CDEIS decline > 5 from baseline) was significantly higher in the LDN group compared to placebo. Seventy-two per cent (13/18) of LDN patients achieved an endoscopic response compared to 25% (4/16) of placebo patients (RR 2.89; 95% CI 1.18 to 7.08). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic remission. Endoscopic remission (CDEIS < 3) was achieved in 22% (4/18) of the LDN group compared to 0% (0/16) of the placebo group (RR 8.05; 95% CI 0.47 to 138.87). Pooled data from both studies show no statistically significant differences in withdrawals due to adverse events or specific adverse events including sleep disturbance, unusual dreams, headache, decreased appetite, nausea and fatigue. No serious adverse events were reported in either study. GRADE analyses rated the overall quality of the evidence for the primary and secondary outcomes (i.e. clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic response, and adverse events) as low due to serious imprecision (sparse data).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is insufficient evidence to allow any firm conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of LDN used to treat patients with active Crohn's disease. Data from one small study suggests that LDN may provide a benefit in terms of clinical and endoscopic response in adult patients with active Crohn's disease. Data from two small studies suggest that LDN does not increase the rate of specific adverse events relative to placebo. However, these results need to be interpreted with caution as they are based on very small numbers of patients and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low due to serious imprecision. Further randomized controlled trials are required to assess the efficacy and safety of LDN therapy in active Crohn's disease in both adults and children. One study is currently ongoing (NCT01810185).

Consensus statement AIGO/SICCR diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation (part II: treatment)

The second part of the Consensus Statement of the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery reports on the treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation. There is no evidence that increasing fluid intake and physical activity can relieve the symptoms of chronic constipation. Patients with normal-transit constipation should increase their fibre intake through their diet or with commercial fibre. Osmotic laxatives may be effective in patients who do not respond to fibre supplements. Stimulant laxatives should be reserved for patients who do not respond to osmotic laxatives. Controlled trials have shown that serotoninergic enterokinetic agents, such as prucalopride, and prosecretory agents, such as lubiprostone, are effective in the treatment of patients with chronic constipation. Surgery is sometimes necessary. Total colectomy with ileorectostomy may be considered in patients with slow-transit constipation and inertia coli who are resistant to medical therapy and who do not have defecatory disorders, generalised motility disorders or psychological disorders. Randomised controlled trials have established the efficacy of rehabilitative treatment in dys-synergic defecation. Many surgical procedures may be used to treat obstructed defecation in patients with acquired anatomical defects, but none is considered to be the gold standard. Surgery should be reserved for selected patients with an impaired quality of life. Obstructed defecation is often associated with pelvic organ prolapse. Surgery with the placement of prostheses is replacing fascial surgery in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, but the efficacy and safety of such procedures have not yet been established.

Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation: a European-focused systematic literature review of disease burden

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic literature review to assess burden of disease and unmet medical needs in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with constipation (IBS-C), with a focus on five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and grey literature searches were carried out using terms for IBS and constipation, to identify studies reporting epidemiological, clinical, humanistic, or economic outcomes for IBS-C, published between 2000 and 2010.

RESULTS

Searches identified 885 unique abstracts and 33 supplementary articles, of which 100 publications and six grey literature sources met the inclusion criteria. Among patients with IBS, the prevalence estimates of IBS-C ranged from 1 to 44%. Co-morbid conditions, such as personality traits, psychological distress, and stress, were common. Patients with IBS-C had lower health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) compared with the general population, and clinical trials suggested that effectively treating IBS-C improves HRQoL. The European societal cost of IBS-C is largely unknown, as no IBS-C-specific European cost-of-illness studies were identified. Two cost analyses demonstrated the substantial societal impact of IBS-C, including reduced productivity at work and work absenteeism. Guidelines offered similar recommendations for the diagnosis and management of IBS; however, recommendations specifically for IBS-C varied by country. Current IBS-C treatment options have limited efficacy and the risk:benefit profile of early 5-HT(4) agonists restricts clinical use.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates a clear need for European-focused IBS-C burden-of-disease and cost-of-illness studies to address identified evidence gaps. There is a need for new therapies for IBS-C that are effective, well tolerated, and have a positive impact on HRQoL.

Consensus statement AIGO/SICCR diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation (Part II: Treatment)

The second part of the Consensus Statement of the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery reports on the treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation. There is no evidence that increasing fluid intake and physical activity can relieve the symptoms of chronic constipation. Patients with normal-transit constipation should increase their fibre intake through their diet or with commercial fibre. Osmotic laxatives may be effective in patients who do not respond to fibre supplements. Stimulant laxatives should be reserved for patients who do not respond to osmotic laxatives. Controlled trials have shown that serotoninergic enterokinetic agents, such as prucalopride, and prosecretory agents, such as lubiprostone, are effective in the treatment of patients with chronic constipation. Surgery is sometimes necessary. Total colectomy with ileorectostomy may be considered in patients with slow-transit constipation and inertia coli who are resistant to medical therapy and who do not have defecatory disorders, generalised motility disorders or psychological disorders. Randomised controlled trials have established the efficacy of rehabilitative treatment in dys-synergic defecation. Many surgical procedures may be used to treat obstructed defecation in patients with acquired anatomical defects, but none is considered to be the gold standard. Surgery should be reserved for selected patients with an impaired quality of life. Obstructed defecation is often associated with pelvic organ prolapse. Surgery with the placement of prostheses is replacing fascial surgery in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, but the efficacy and safety of such procedures have not yet been established.

Consensus statement AIGO/SICCR diagnosis and treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation (part II: treatment)

The second part of the Consensus Statement of the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery reports on the treatment of chronic constipation and obstructed defecation. There is no evidence that increasing fluid intake and physical activity can relieve the symptoms of chronic constipation. Patients with normal-transit constipation should increase their fibre intake through their diet or with commercial fibre. Osmotic laxatives may be effective in patients who do not respond to fibre supplements. Stimulant laxatives should be reserved for patients who do not respond to osmotic laxatives. Controlled trials have shown that serotoninergic enterokinetic agents, such as prucalopride, and prosecretory agents, such as lubiprostone, are effective in the treatment of patients with chronic constipation. Surgery is sometimes necessary. Total colectomy with ileorectostomy may be considered in patients with slow-transit constipation and inertia coli who are resistant to medical therapy and who do not have defecatory disorders, generalised motility disorders or psychological disorders. Randomised controlled trials have established the efficacy of rehabilitative treatment in dys-synergic defecation. Many surgical procedures may be used to treat obstructed defecation in patients with acquired anatomical defects, but none is considered to be the gold standard. Surgery should be reserved for selected patients with an impaired quality of life. Obstructed defecation is often associated with pelvic organ prolapse. Surgery with the placement of prostheses is replacing fascial surgery in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, but the efficacy and safety of such procedures have not yet been established.

Current and novel therapeutic options for irritable bowel syndrome management

Irritable bowel syndrome is a functional gastrointestinal disorder affecting up to 3-15% of the general population in western countries. It is characterised by unexplained abdominal pain, discomfort, and bloating in association with altered bowel habits. The pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome is multifactorial involving disturbances of the brain-gut axis. The pathophysiology provides the rationale for pharmacotherapy: abnormal gastrointestinal motor functions, visceral hypersensitivity, psychosocial factors, autonomic dysfunction, and mucosal immune activation. Understanding the mechanisms, and their mediators or modulators including neurotransmitters and receptors have led to several therapeutic approaches including agents acting on the serotonin receptor or serotonin transporter system, antidepressants, novel selective anticholinergics, alpha-adrenergic agonists, opioid agents, cholecystokinin-antagonists, neurokinin-antagonists, somatostatin receptor agonists, corticotropin releasing factor antagonists, chloride channel activators, guanylate cyclase-c agonists, melatonin, atypical benzodiazepines, antibiotics, immune modulators and probiotics. The mechanisms and current evidence regarding efficacy of these agents are reviewed.

Advances in understanding the pathogenesis of irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal motility disorder characterized by abdominal discomfort/pain associated with altered bowel habits. At present, the pathophysiology of IBS is still unknown. Genetic factors, psychosocial factors, and changes in gastrointestinal motility and visceral hypersensitivity are traditionally thought to play a crucial role in symptom generation in IBS. Recent studies have identified new additional factors (such as dysregulation of the brain-gut axis, gastrointestinal infection, and activation of mast cells in the intestinal mucosa with consequent release of bioactive substances) that are correlated with the pathogenesis of IBS. In this article, we will review the recent advances in the research on the pathogenesis of IBS.

Serotonin in the gastrointestinal tract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the role of serotonin and its control in the manifestations and treatment of lower functional gastrointestinal disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has explored several novel concepts in the association of serotonin and symptoms, alterations in tissue levels of serotonin and its reuptake protein, aspects of the genetic determinants of serotonergic function (particularly 5-HTTLPR) and its relationship to gastrointestinal motor and sensory functions, and novel serotonergic agents used in therapy of lower functional gastrointestinal disorders. The most consistent findings are the increase in plasma 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in diarrheal diseases and reduction in constipation. The serotonin transporter in platelets has an impact on the circulating level of 5-HT. Meta-analysis shows that 5-HTTLPR genotype is not significantly associated with irritable bowel syndrome in Whites or Asians. New 5-HT3 antagonists and 5-HT4 agonists are efficacious and promise to provide relief for patients if they can pass regulatory hurdles.

SUMMARY

Although the most relevant implication for clinical practice remains the evidence that serotonergic agents are efficacious in the treatment of chronic constipation, chronic diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome, the role of genetic control of 5-HT and its receptors is the subject of ongoing research, and is likely to enhance understanding of the mechanisms and treatment of these diseases.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2007

This paper is the thirtieth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2007 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia; stress and social status; tolerance and dependence; learning and memory; eating and drinking; alcohol and drugs of abuse; sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology; mental illness and mood; seizures and neurologic disorders; electrical-related activity and neurophysiology; general activity and locomotion; gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions; cardiovascular responses; respiration and thermoregulation; and immunological responses.

Updates on treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal disorder characterized by abdominal pain and discomfort in association with altered bowel habits. It is estimated to affect 10%-15% of the Western population, and has a large impact on quality of life and (in)direct healthcare costs. IBS is a multifactorial disorder involving dysregulation within the brain-gut axis, and it is frequently associated with gastrointestinal motor and sensory dysfunction, enteric and central nervous system irregularities, neuroimmune dysregulation, and post-infectious inflammation. As with other functional medical disorders, the treatment for IBS can be challenging. Conventional therapy for those with moderate to severe symptoms is largely unsatisfactory, and the development of new and effective drugs is made difficult by the complex pathogenesis, variety of symptoms, and lack of objective clinical findings that are the hallmark of this disorder. Fortunately, research advances over the past several decades have provided insight into potential mechanisms responsible for the pathogenesis of IBS, and have led to the development of several promising pharmaceutical agents. In recent years there has been much publicity over several of these new IBS medications (alosetron and tegaserod) because of their reported association with ischemic colitis and cardiovascular disease. While these agents remain available for use under restricted prescribing programs, this highlights the need for continued development of safe and effective medication for IBS. This article provides a physiologically-based overview of recently developed and frequently employed pharmaceutical agents used to treat IBS, and discusses some non-pharmaceutical options that may be beneficial in this disorder.