Can Naloxegol Therapy Improve Quality of Life in Patients with Advanced Cancer?

Naloxegol for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Cancer Pain: A Pooled Analysis of Real-World Data

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.

An observational post-authorization safety study (PASS) of naloxegol drug utilization in four European countries

PURPOSE

Naloxegol has been shown to be an efficient alternative to treat opioid-induced constipation (OIC). This study aimed at describing the characteristics of naloxegol users and assessing patterns of naloxegol use and associated factors.

METHODS

This drug utilization cohort study used observational registry data on patients newly prescribed naloxegol in four European countries. Patient characteristics and patterns of naloxegol use and associated factors were described.

RESULTS

A total of 17 254 naloxegol users were identified across the countries. Their median age was 56-71 years, and each country had a majority of women (ranging 57.5%-62.9%). Multiple comorbidities, including cancer, were common. Natural opium alkaloids and osmotically acting laxatives (excluding saline) were the most frequently used opioids and laxatives. Overall prior use of opioids ranged from 91.9% to 99.6% and overall prior use of laxatives ranged from 69.9% to 92.4%. Up to 77.7% had prior use of medications with interaction potential, and up to 44.5% used them concurrently with naloxegol. Naloxegol was discontinued by 55.1%-90.9% of users, typically during the first 30 days. Approximately 10%-30% switched to or augmented the treatment with another constipation medication or restarted naloxegol after discontinuation. Augmentation with another constipation medication was relatively common, suggesting that naloxegol was used for multifactorial constipation.

CONCLUSION

The present study reflects real-world clinical use of naloxegol, including in vulnerable patient groups. Some naloxegol users lacked laxative or regular opioid use within six months before index date or used naloxegol concomitantly with medications presenting an interaction potential.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2021

This paper is the forty-fourth consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2021 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonizts and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

Prostate cancer induced bone pain: pathobiology, current treatments and pain responses from recent clinical trials

PURPOSE

Metastatic spread of prostate cancer to the skeleton may result in debilitating bone pain. In this review, we address mechanisms underpinning the pathobiology of metastatic prostate cancer induced bone pain (PCIBP) that include sensitization and sprouting of primary afferent sensory nerve fibres in bone. We also review current treatments and pain responses evoked by various treatment modalities in clinical trials in this patient population.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature using PubMed to identify research on the pathobiology of PCIBP. Additionally, we reviewed clinical trials of various treatment modalities in patients with PCIBP with pain response outcomes published in the past 7 years.

RESULTS

Recent clinical trials show that radionuclides, given either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, evoked favourable pain responses in many patients and a single fraction of local external beam radiation therapy was as effective as multiple fractions. However, treatment with chemotherapy, small molecule inhibitors and/or immunotherapy agents, produced variable pain responses but pain response was the primary endpoint in only one of these trials. Additionally, there were no published trials of potentially novel analgesic agents in patients with PCIBP.

CONCLUSION

There is a knowledge gap for clinical trials of chemotherapy, small molecule inhibitors and/or immunotherapy in patients with PCIBP where pain response is the primary endpoint. Also, there are no novel analgesic agents on the horizon for the relief of PCIBP and this is an area of large unmet medical need that warrants concerted research attention.