A Systematic Review of Naldemedine and Naloxegol for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Cancer Patients

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.

Naldemedine and Magnesium Oxide as First-Line Medications for Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Comparative Database Study in Japanese Patients With Cancer Pain

Introduction Naldemedine and magnesium oxide are common first-line early laxative medications used in the real-world scenario in Japan, for patients with cancer pain who receive opioid prescriptions, as per a nationwide hospital claims database study. However, the real-world prescription patterns and associated outcomes are unknown. Methods In this retrospective, cohort study using the Medical Data Vision (MDV) database (January 2018 to December 2020), data were collected from eligible patients (who had a long-term prescription of strong opioids, for >30 days) in Japan with naldemedine or magnesium oxide as the first-line laxative prescription, for a long-term opioid prescription for cancer pain with ≥6 months post-opioid observation period. A laxative prescription within three days after the opioid prescription date was termed an "early" prescription. The composite incidence of dose increase or addition/change of laxatives at three months after the start of the opioid prescription was the primary endpoint after adjusting baseline characteristics between the treatment arms by propensity score matching. Results After propensity score matching, 1717 and 544 patients who were prescribed naldemedine and magnesium oxide each were included in the early prescription and non-early prescription groups, respectively. Even after matching, the incidence of death was not adjusted enough and was significantly higher in the naldemedine arm than in the magnesium oxide arm in the non-early group but comparable in the early group. The incidence of addition, change, or dose increase was significantly higher in the naldemedine arm than in the magnesium oxide arm of the early prescription group (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), 1.08 (1.00, 1.17); p=0.0402); the incidence was comparable between the arms of the non-early group. Conclusion These findings may provide valuable insights into real-world clinical treatment patterns and preliminary evidence for the selection of first-line medications to mitigate opioid-induced constipation in Japanese patients with cancer pain.

Impacts of genetic polymorphisms and cancer cachexia on naldemedine pharmacokinetics and bowel movements in patients receiving opioid analgesics

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Clinical responses to naldemedine vary between individuals with advanced cancer. This is a prospective, single-center, observational study aimed to evaluate the influence of genetic polymorphisms and cachexia status on plasma naldemedine and clinical responses.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients being treated with naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation under treatment of cancer pain were enrolled. Plasma naldemedine concentrations were determined on the fourth day or later after administration of naldemedine, and the associations with genotypes, cachexia status, and clinical responses were assessed.

RESULTS

Cancer patients exhibited a large variation in the plasma naldemedine concentrations, and it was correlated with serum total protein level. Patients who were homozygous CYP3A5*3 had a higher plasma concentration of naldemedine than those with the *1 allele. ABCB1 genotypes tested in this study were not associated with plasma naldemedine. A negative correlation was observed between the plasma naldemedine concentration and 4β-hydroxycholesterol level. The plasma naldemedine concentration was lower in patients with refractory cachexia than in those with precachexia and cachexia. While serum levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and acute-phase proteins were higher in patients with refractory cachexia, they were not associated with plasma naldemedine. A higher plasma concentration of naldemedine, CYP3A5*3/*3, and an earlier naldemedine administration after starting opioid analgesics were related to improvement of bowel movements.

CONCLUSION

Plasma naldemedine increased under deficient activity of CYP3A5 in cancer patients. Cachectic patients with a higher serum IL-6 had a lower plasma naldemedine. Plasma naldemedine, related to CYP3A5 genotype, and the initiation timing of naldemedine were associated with improved bowel movements.

Efficacy of Naldemedine on Intestinal Hypomotility and Adhesions in Rodent Models of Postoperative Ileus

Postoperative ileus (POI) often decreases patients' QOL because of prolonged hospitalization and readmission. Alvimopan, a peripheral μ-opioid receptor antagonist, is currently the only therapeutic drug for POI. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of naldemedine (a peripheral μ-opioid receptor antagonist with a non-competitive pharmacological profile different from that of alvimopan) on postoperative intestinal hypomotility and adhesion in rodent models, and compare it with the effects of alvimopan. Oral administration of naldemedine (0.3 mg/kg) and alvimopan (3 mg/kg) significantly inhibited the decrease in intestinal motility induced by mechanical irritation in mice (p < 0.01, for both). Naldemedine (1 mg/kg) significantly shortened the adhesion length in chemical-induced postoperative adhesion model rats (p < 0.05). Alvimopan (3 mg/kg) also significantly reduced the adhesion ratio (p < 0.01). These findings suggest that naldemedine is effective for postoperative intestinal hypomotility and adhesions in rodents (i.e., as for alvimopan). Thus, naldemedine may be a useful option for the treatment of POI.

Peripherally-active mu-opioid receptor antagonists for constipation in critically ill patients receiving opioids: A case-series and a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

Constipation is frequent in critically ill patients, and potentially related to adverse outcomes. Peripherally-active mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) are approved for opioid-induced constipation, but information on their efficacy and safety in critically ill patients is limited. We present a single-center, retrospective, case-series of the use of naldemedine for opioid-associated constipation, and we systematically reviewed the use of PAMORAs in critically ill patients.

METHODS

Case-series included consecutive mechanically-ventilated patients; constipation was defined as absence of bowel movements for >3 days. Naldemedine was administered after failure of the local laxation protocol. Systematic review: PubMed was searched for studies of PAMORAs to treat opioid-induced constipation in adult critically ill patients.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

time to laxation, and number of patients laxating at the shortest follow-up.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

gastric residual volumes and adverse events.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 13 patients were included in the case-series; the most common diagnosis was COVID-19 ARDS. Patients had their first bowel movement 1 [0;2] day after naldemedine. Daily gastric residual volume was 725 [405;1805] before vs. 250 [45;1090] mL after naldemedine, p = 0.0078. Systematic review identified nine studies (two RCTs, one prospective case-series, three retrospective case-series and three case-reports). Outcomes were similar between groups, with a trend toward a lower gastric residual volume in PAMORAs group.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

In a highly-selected case-series of patients with refractory, opioid-associated constipation, naldemedine was safe and associated to reduced gastric residuals and promoting laxation. In the systematic review and meta-analysis, the use of PAMORAs (mainly methylnaltrexone) was safe and associated with a reduced intolerance to enteral feeding but no difference in the time to laxation.

Influence of Brain Metastasis on Analgesia-Related Outcomes in Patients with Lung and Breast Cancers Treated with Naldemedine: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Naldemedine is structurally designed to prevent passage across the blood-brain barrier (BBB), resulting in the attenuation of opioid-induced constipation without interfering with the analgesic effects of opioids. However, the influence of brain metastasis (BM), as one indicator of BBB disruption, on the analgesic effects of opioids in patients treated with naldemedine remains unclear. To examine whether the analgesic effects of opioids following naldemedine treatment are lower in patients with BM than in those without BM, we surveyed inpatients with lung and breast cancers treated with naldemedine at Fujita Health University Hospital between April 2017 and March 2022. Changes in the numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), and the number of rescues were assessed as analgesia-related outcomes during the first 7 days of naldemedine treatment in patients with or without BM, matched by the propensity score. In total, 172 patients were enrolled. After propensity-score matching, 30 patients with BM and 60 patients without BM were included in the analysis. Changes in NRS scores, MMEs, and the number of rescues did not differ between patients with and without BM. In the linear mixed-effects model, the coefficient of interaction between patients with or without BM and the days for each outcome was not statistically significant. BM does not influence the analgesic effect of opioids in patients with lung and breast cancers treated with naldemedine. Naldemedine may be useful for treating BM.

Effects and Limitations of Naldemedine for Opioid-Induced Urinary Retention: A Case Report

A 78-year-old man with postoperative recurrence of esophageal cancer was admitted to the hospital due to chest pain and dyspnea. Oral short-acting opioids provided some relief, but chest pain persisted and worsened, leading to the initiation of a transdermal fentanyl patch. However, the patient developed opioid-induced urinary retention, which was treated with a naldemedine, a medication used for opioid-induced constipation and urinary retention. Opioid switching led to recurrent urinary retention, requiring placement of a urinary catheter. The patient ultimately required continuous deep sedation for refractory symptoms and died several days later.

Naldemedine-induced opioid withdrawal with restlessness as the predominant symptom in a palliative care setting

OBJECTIVES

Opioid analgesics play a central role in cancer pain treatment; however, it has been reported that opioid-induced constipation (OIC) develops in 80% of patients using opioid analgesics and leads to a decrease in quality of life. Naldemedine improves constipation without affecting the analgesic action of opioid analgesics via peripheral μ-opioid receptors.

METHODS

We report a terminally ill cancer patient who was diagnosed with opioid withdrawal syndrome (OWS) based on symptoms centered around restlessness and sweating that developed 43 days after administration of naldemedine for OIC.

RESULTS

The patient was a 78-year-old woman who was diagnosed with stage IVB uterine sarcoma in October, 1 year prior to her visit to our clinic,  and underwent chemotherapy after surgery, but the disease became progressive. Thereafter, metastasis to the fourth thoracic vertebrae (Th4) was identified, and loxoprofen and acetaminophen were started for pain at the metastatic site. Oxycodone hydrochloride hydrate 10 mg/day was additionally administered on postoperative day 11, followed by naldemedine 0.2 mg/day for OIC. On the 43rd day after administration, the patient began to wander the hospital ward in a wheelchair and became noticeably restless. OWS due to naldemedine administration was suspected, and naldemedine was discontinued. The symptoms improved 7 days later, and no similar symptoms were observed thereafter.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Patients receiving palliative care often exhibit psychiatric symptoms such as anxiety and depression, but OWS due to naldemedine should also be considered as a potential cause.

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Effectiveness of Naldemedine in the Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients With Cancer Pain: Post-hoc Subgroup Analysis of Post-marketing Surveillance in Japan

BACKGROUND

Opioid-induced constipation is common and greatly affects the quality of life but is often under-recognised and undertreated. This study aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation with cancer pain according to specific subgroups of clinical interest.

METHODS

In this exploratory post-hoc subgroup analysis of post-marketing surveillance from Japan (UMIN: 000042851), data were investigated by the subgroups: age (≥75, <75 years), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS 0-2, 3-4), constipation severity (mild, moderate, severe), brain metastasis (yes, no), anticancer drug treatment (yes, no), opioid at naldemedine initiation (fentanyl only, only strong opioids other than fentanyl, weak opioids only, other), and prior or concomitant use of laxative (only osmotic/saline laxatives, only stimulant laxatives, other, none). Enrolled patients (n = 1184) received naldemedine (0.2 mg once daily) orally for up to 12 weeks. Regarding safety endpoints, the incidence of adverse drug reactions, including diarrhoea, was determined within each subgroup. Regarding effectiveness endpoints, improvement rates in the frequency and condition of bowel movements were investigated by subgroups.

RESULTS

The incidence of adverse drug reactions, including diarrhoea, among subgroups ranged from 7.74% to 16.08% (diarrhoea: 5.95% to 13.19%), compared to 11.30% (diarrhoea: 9.09%) in the total population. Through week two to week 12, improvement rates in the frequency and condition of bowel movement among subgroups ranged from 63.6% to 89.7% and 67.6% to 94.9%, compared to 75.0% to 83.2% and 80.0% to 88.0% in the total population, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Naldemedine was well tolerated and effective in patients with opioid-induced constipation and cancer pain regardless of the subgroups investigated.

Efficacy and safety of naldemedine treatment for opioid-induced constipation in gastrointestinal cancer: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal cancers are one of the most common cancer cases worldwide. Cancer treatment is multidisciplinary, which includes opioid pain management. Opioid analgesics cause opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with the onset of effect. Naldemedine, a peripheral opioid receptor antagonist, is an OIC-modifying agent, but no focused efficacy and safety analysis has been conducted for its use in gastrointestinal cancers.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with naldemedine at ten institutions in Japan from June 2017 to August 2019. Patients with gastrointestinal cancer who initiated treatment with opioids during hospitalization and were treated with naldemedine for the first time were included in the study. The gastrointestinal cancer types included were esophageal, gastric, small bowel, and colorectal cancers. We assessed the defecation frequency before and after the initiation of naldemedine use. Responders were defined as patients who defecated three or more times/week, with an increase from the baseline of one or more bowel movements/week over seven days after starting naldemedine.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were observed for one week before and after starting naldemedine. Twenty-one patients had an increase in defecation frequency of at least three times per week or at least once per week above the baseline. The response rate was 63.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 46.6-77.9%]. The median number of bowel movements for a week before and after the initiation of naldemedine treatment was 3 (range, 0-13) and 7 (range, 1-39), respectively, in the overall population (n=33), with a significant increase in defecation frequency following naldemedine administration (Wilcoxon signed rank test, P<0.005). Diarrhea was the predominant gastrointestinal symptom, with 13 (39.4%) patients experiencing grade 1 and none experiencing grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events. The frequency of other grade 1 adverse events was low abdominal pain in two patients, nausea in two patients, and anorexia in one patient, without any grade 2-4 adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study suggest that naldemedine is effective and safe in clinical practice for gastrointestinal cancer treatment.

[Survey of Prophylactic Administration of Naldemedine for Opioid-induced Constipation]

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC), an adverse event that occurs due to opioid analgesics, reportedly causes poor quality of life and adherence to opioid analgesics in patients. Therefore, this issue must be addressed appropriately. Naldemedine (NAL), a peripherally-acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, is currently recommended for treating OIC when other laxatives are ineffective, but there have been no clinical reports of NAL being used prophylactically for OIC. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective survey of hospitalized patients who received NAL as prophylaxis for OIC with strong opioid analgesics to clarify the reality of this situation and to consider points to be taken into account in its clinical implementation. In this study, 61.7% of the subjects had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or higher. The rate of addition of new laxatives and increased laxatives during seven days of NAL prophylaxis was 46.8%, and the rate of diarrhea was 6.1%. This study suggests that patients initiated with strong opioid analgesics during hospitalization often presented with poor performance status, and it is important to pay attention to constipation even under NAL prophylaxis. However, the incidence of diarrhea was low, and the safety of NAL prophylaxis was considered to be good.

An update on the use of pharmacotherapy for opioid-induced bowel dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

With the growing rate of aging and the incidence of chronic diseases, there has been an upsurge in opioid prescription and abuse worldwide. This has been associated with increased reports of opioid-related adverse events, particularly opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD), calling for a rational clinical management strategy.

AREAS COVERED

Through searching PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, English literature was gathered as of 1 January 2017. Furthermore, the USFDA, EMA, TGA, Clinicaltrials.Gov, WHO-ICTRP databases, and the latest guidelines were reviewed to extract ongoing clinical studies and provide an evidence-based expert opinion with detailed information on efficacy, safety, approval status, and pharmacokinetics of the currently used medications.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the significant burden of OIBD, the clinical development of agents lags behind disease progress. Although in most places, management of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is initiated by lifestyle modifications followed by laxatives, opioid antagonists, and secretagogue agents, there are still major conflicts among global guidelines. The fundamental reason is the lack of head-to-head clinical trials providing inter- and intragroup comparisons between PAMORAs, laxatives, and secretagogue agents. These investigations must be accompanied by further valid biopharmaceutical and economic evaluations, paving the way for rational clinical judgment in each context.

A Retrospective Observational Study of Factors Affecting the Efficacy of Concurrent Prescription of Naldemedine for Opioid-Induced Constipation Caused by Oxycodone Tablets

Naldemedine is indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC), but reports on its efficacy in preventing OIC are few. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated factors affecting the efficacy of concurrent prescription of naldemedine on OIC. Outpatients with cancer who were started on oxycodone 10 mg/d were included in the study. The eligible patients were classified by their physicians into the following three groups: Group A used regular laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and initiated naldemedine treatment simultaneously with oxycodone administration, Group B did not take laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and started naldemedine simultaneously with oxycodone administration, and Group C had been administering regular laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and were not prescribed naldemedine simultaneously with oxycodone treatment. The Support Team Assessment Schedule Japanese edition score for constipation, frequency of defecation, Bristol Stool Form Scale, sense of incomplete rectal evacuation, and development or worsening of straining to pass bowel movements were compared among the three groups before and after oxycodone administration. In Group B, there was significant worsening of the four parameters except for the sense of incomplete rectal evacuation, whereas Groups A and C did not present any changes. In logistic regression analysis, body weight ≥51.8 kg was a factor significantly decreasing the preventive effect of naldemedine on OIC, and regular use of laxatives was a factor significantly increasing the preventive effect of naldemedine on OIC. Thus, the initiation of naldemedine should be considered depending on the body weight and regular laxative use.

A peripheral opioid antagonist for treating urinary retention induced by opioids: A case report

BACKGROUND

Urinary retention is a poorly studied opioid-related adverse effect. There is a paucity of data regarding the treatment of such disturbance in patients with advanced cancer receiving opioids.

ACTUAL CASE

A young man, without comorbidities, was receiving 30 mg/day of oxycodone for abdominal pain due to pancreatic cancer, unsuccessfully. He also complained of severe urinary retention that developed after initiation of opioid therapy. Methadone therapy was effective on pain intensity, but bladder dysfunction persisted.

POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION

Only anedoctal experience exists for opioid-induced urinary retention. The options included alpha-receptor blockers and flavoxate, which are symptomatic drugs, not addressed to the possible mechanism.

FORMULATION OF A PLAN

The use of a peripheral opioid antagonist was planned, according to the presumed mechanism of urinary retention. Thus, naldemedine 200 mcg was prescribed for relieving urinary retention.

OUTCOME

The day after starting naldemedine, urinary retention completely reversed and pain was well-controlled.

LESSONS

The rational of using naldemedine was based on the component of opioid-induced urinary retention due to involvement of peripheral receptors in the bladder and sphincter.

VIEW

In this case report, the effect of the peripheral opioid antagonist was prompt and long-lasting. Future studies of this neglected adverse effect of opioids should be performed to confirm this observation.

[Efficacy Survey of Naldemedine in the Poor-performance Status Group]

Naldemedine (Nal) is widely used as a therapeutic drug against opioid-induced constipation. However, patients in phase III trials are limited to those with good performance status (PS). Cancer patients may have inferior PS owing to progression of symptoms and adverse events from chemotherapy. Therefore, it is important to survey the efficacy of Nal in patients with poor PS. This study aimed to evaluate Nal efficacy in patients with poor PS. We retrospectively investigated patients from July 2017 to June 2019 and compared Nal efficacy between patients with good and poor PS. The efficacy of Nal was evaluated using changes in the number of spontaneous bowel movements 7 days before and after the introduction of Nal with reference to previous reports. Multivariate analysis was performed to reveal whether poor PS affects Nal efficacy. In total, 141 patients at the Hokkaido University Hospital were analyzed. The effective rate of Nal from day 1 to day 7 of administration was 71.7% and 71.4% in the patients with good and poor PS, respectively, that from day 1 to day 2 of administration was 61.1% and 57.1%, respectively, and that from day 3 to day 7 of administration was 60.2% and 71.4%, respectively, suggesting an absence of significant differences. Furthermore, results of multivariate analysis showed that "best supportive care" and "body weight (55 kg and above)" reduced Nal efficacy. In conclusion, Nal showed similar effectiveness in patients with poor PS as that in those with good PS.

A retrospective study of the efficacy and safety of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation in thoracic cancer patients

Background

We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study on the efficacy and safety of naldemedine in thoracic cancer patients using opioids in clinical practice.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated thoracic cancer patients treated with naldemedine at 10 institutions in Japan. Clinical data of patients administered naldemedine between June 2017 and August 2019 were extracted from electronic medical records. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (i) patients hospitalized for at least seven days before and after naldemedine administration, and (ii) those whose frequency of defecation was entered in the medical records.

Results

Forty patients were analyzed, and defecation frequency was observed for at least seven days before and after naldemedine administration. The response rate was 65.0% (95% CI: 50.2%–79.7%). The number of defecations increased significantly after naldemedine administration in the overall population, as well as among only those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine administration, and those that were administered ≥30 mg/day of morphine equivalent. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event in all grades, occurring in 11 patients (27.5%), of which 9 (81.8%) were grade 1 or 2. None of the patients experienced grade 4 or higher adverse events.

Conclusion

The efficacy and safety of naldemedine for thoracic cancer patients in clinical practice were comparable with those of prospective studies, which suggest that naldemedine may be effective and feasible for most thoracic cancer patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Naldemedine for Patients with Cancer with Opioid-Induced Constipation in Clinical Practice: A Real-World Retrospective Study

The efficacy and safety of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation in patients with cancer has not been investigated in clinical practice. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study to assess the effects of naldemedine among 10 Japanese institutions between June 2017 and August 2019. We evaluated the number of defecations 7 days before and after naldemedine administration. A total of 149 patients (89 male) with a median age of 72 years (range, 38−96) were included. The performance status was 0−1, 2, and ≥3 in 40, 38, and 71 patients, respectively. The median opioid dose in oral morphine equivalents was 30 mg/day (range: 7.5−800 mg). We observed 98 responders and 51 non-responders. The median number of defecations increased significantly in the 7 days following naldemedine administration from three to six (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that an opioid dose <30 mg/day [odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01−4.32; p = 0.042] was significantly correlated with the effect of naldemedine. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event (38.2%) among all grades. The efficacy and safety of naldemedine in clinical practice are comparable to those of prospective studies, suggesting that it is effective in most patients.

Use of naldemedine is associated with reduced incidence of hyperactive delirium in cancer patients with opioid-induced constipation: a nationwide retrospective cohort study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Medical benefits of peripherally-acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists other than improving opioid-induced constipation remain unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the association between the use of naldemedine and incidence of hyperactive delirium in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and opioid therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a propensity score-matched analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan. Cancer patients receiving both inpatient chemotherapy and opioid therapy from June 1, 2017 to March 31, 2018 were included. Patients receiving naldemedine were matched to control patients by propensity score. Our primary outcome was the incidence of hyperactive delirium during hospitalization, and secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, hospital costs, in-hospital mortality, and incidence of ileus.

RESULTS

Of 34,031 patients receiving inpatient chemotherapy and opioid therapy, 1905 (5.6%) were included in the naldemedine group. After one-to-four propensity score matching, 1904 patients were included in the naldemedine group and 7616 in the control group. Naldemedine users had significantly reduced incidence of hyperactive delirium compared with the control patients (19.4% vs 23.3%; risk difference, -3.9 [95% confidence interval, -5.9 - -1.9]; risk ratio, 0.83 [0.75-0.92]; P<0.001; subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.85 [0.75-0.97]; P=0.015). The median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the naldemedine group compared with the control group (12 days [interquartile range, 6-23] vs 14 days [6-26]; P=0.001). The median hospital costs were also significantly lower in the naldemedine group compared with the control group (US $6179 [3351-10,026] vs US $6576 [3436-11,107]; P<0.001). No significant differences were found for in-hospital mortality or incidence of ileus between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the use of naldemedine may have benefits in preventing hyperactive delirium, shortening hospital stay, and decreasing hospital costs in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and opioid therapy.

Real-World Patient Characteristics and Treatment Patterns of Naldemedine for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Chart Review Study

Background and Objectives: Naldemedine is a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist that improves opioid-induced constipation. Although clinical trials have excluded patients with poor performance status (PS) and those started on naldemedine early after opioid initiation, clinical practice has used naldemedine for the same patients. Therefore, we investigated the treatment patterns of naldemedine in a real-world setting. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective chart review study of opioid-treated patients with cancer receiving naldemedine. Adverse events that occurred within 7 days of naldemedine initiation were evaluated in those who received one or more doses of the same. Effectiveness was assessed in patients who used naldemedine for more than 7 days. Results: A total of 296 patients satisfied the eligibility criteria, among whom 129 (43.6%) had a PS of ≥3 and 176 (59.5%) started naldemedine within 2 weeks of opioid initiation. Moreover, 203 (79.6%) patients had ≥3 bowel movements per week. Incidences of all grades of diarrhea and abdominal pain were 87 (29.4%) and 12 (4.1%), respectively. No patient had grade 4 or higher adverse events. Conclusions: Although nearly half of the patients receiving naldemedine in clinical practice belonged to populations that were not included in the clinical trials, our results suggested that naldemedine in clinical practice had the same efficacy and safety as that in clinical trials.

Involvement of the Peripheral μ-Opioid Receptor in Tramadol-Induced Constipation in Rodents

Tramadol is a weak opioid that produces analgesic effect via both the μ-opioid receptor (MOR) and non-opioid targets. Constipation is the most common opioid-related side effect in patients with cancer and non-cancer pain. However, the contribution of MOR to tramadol-induced constipation is unclear. Therefore, we used naldemedine, a peripherally acting MOR antagonist, and MOR-knockout mice to investigate the involvement of peripheral MOR in tramadol-induced constipation using a small intestinal transit model. A single dose of tramadol (3-100 mg/kg, per os (p.o.)) inhibited small intestinal transit dose-dependently in rats. Naldemedine (0.01-10 mg/kg, p.o.) blocked the inhibition of small intestinal transit induced by tramadol (30 mg/kg, p.o.) in rats. The transition rate increased dose-dependently over the range of naldemedine 0.01-0.3 mg/kg, and complete recovery was observed at 0.3-10 m/kg. Additionally, tramadol (30 and 100 mg/kg, subcutaneously (s.c.)) inhibited small intestinal transit in wild-type mice but not in MOR-knockout mice. These results suggest that peripheral MOR participates in tramadol-induced constipation.

Analysis of Predictive Factors for Diarrhea after the Administration of Naldemedine

Naldemedine (NAL), a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, is effective for opioid-induced constipation (OIC). However, diarrhea is the most common adverse event. We investigated the incidence of NAL-induced diarrhea in patients who started NAL at Nagasaki University Hospital between June 2017 and March 2019. Predictors of NAL-induced diarrhea were analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression model. Two hundred and forty-two patients were included in the present study, and NAL-induced diarrhea was observed in 17.8% (43 patients). The results of multiple logistic regression analyses identified the administration of opioid analgesics for 8 d or longer before the initiation of NAL (odds ratio (OR): 2.20, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.04-4.64, p = 0.039), the combination of a laxative (OR: 2.22, 95%CI: 1.03-4.81, p = 0.042), and the combination of CYP3A4 inhibitors (strong/moderate) (OR: 2.80, 95%CI: 1.02-7.67, p = 0.045) as risk factors. Therefore, the development of diarrhea needs to be considered in patients with these risk factors. Furthermore, diarrhea may be controlled by the initiation of NAL within 7 d of opioid analgesics and, where possible, the discontinuation of or change in the combination of moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitors.

Naldemedine: A New Option for OIBD

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) is a common complication in long-term opioid users and abusers. It is a burdensome condition, which significantly limits quality of life and is associated with increasing health costs. OIBD affects up to 60% of patients with chronic non-cancer pain and over 80% of patients suffering from cancer pain and is one of the conditions of the most common symptoms associated with opioid maintenance. Given the continued use of opioids for chronic pain management in appropriate patients, OIBD is likely to persist in clinical practice in the coming years. We will herein review its underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the available treatments. In the last years, pharmaceutical research has focused on the opportunity of targeting peripheral mu-opioid receptors without affecting their analgesic activity in the central nervous system, and several peripherally acting mu-opioid receptors antagonists (PAMORAs) drugs have been approved. We will mainly focus on naldemedine, discussing its pharmacological properties, its clinical efficacy and side effects. Head-to-head comparisons between naldemedine and the other PAMORAs are not available yet, but some considerations will be discussed based on the pharmacological and clinical data. As a whole, the available data suggest that naldemedine is a valid treatment option for OIBD, as it is a well-tolerated drug that alleviates constipation without affecting analgesia or causing symptoms of opioid withdrawal.

A Renal Impairment Subgroup Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Naldemedine for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy

Purpose

Naldemedine, an oral, peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC), is renally excreted. This subgroup analysis integrated data from 3 Phase 3 trials (COMPOSE-1, COMPOSE-2, COMPOSE-3) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of naldemedine in patients with renal impairment (RI).

Patients and Methods

Patients age 18–80 years with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and OIC received oral naldemedine 0.2 mg or placebo once daily. RI subgroups consisted of patients with normal function (baseline glomerular filtration rate ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²), mild (≥60 to <90 mL/min/1.73 m²), and moderate (≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m²) RI. Safety assessments based on ≤12 weeks of treatment from all 3 studies included incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was based on the proportion of responders in COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2 only, defined as ≥3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs)/week and a ≥1-SBM/week increase from baseline for ≥9 of 12 weeks and ≥3 of the last 4 weeks.

Results

In total, 2328 patients were included in this analysis. The incidence of TEAEs was similar in the naldemedine and placebo groups (overall, 47.1% vs 45.6%; normal, 44.6% vs 43.6%; mild RI, 49.0% vs 44.7%; moderate RI, 46.6% vs 55.9%). GI-related TEAEs occurred more frequently in the naldemedine group versus placebo (overall, 21.8% vs 13.8%; normal, 21.6% vs 12.5%; mild RI, 22.6% vs 14.7%; moderate RI, 18.0% vs 14.2%). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the naldemedine 0.2 mg group were responders versus the placebo group (overall, 50.1% vs 34.1%, P<0.0001; normal, 52.0% vs 39.3%; mild RI, 48.3% vs 30.3%; moderate RI, 52.5% vs 31.7%).

Conclusion

This integrated analysis confirmed that OIC treatment with naldemedine 0.2 mg was generally well tolerated and effective in patients with CNCP and mild or moderate RI. Safety and efficacy results were consistent with the overall population.

Clinicaltrials.gov Registration

COMPOSE-1: NCT01965158; COMPOSE-2: NCT01993940; COMPOSE-3: NCT01965652.

The Use of Peripheral μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists (PAMORA) in the Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation: An Update on Their Efficacy and Safety

Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) constitute a class of drugs which reverse opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with similar opioid analgesic effects. OIC differs from other forms of constipation in that it is an iatrogenic condition that occurs when an opioid acts on the dense network of μ-opioid receptors in the enteric system, which affect a variety of functions including gastrointestinal motility, secretion, and other factors that can cause bowel dysfunction. Unfortunately, laxative products, bowel regimens, dietary changes, and lifestyle modifications have limited effectiveness in preventing OIC, Opioid-associated adverse effect which occurs in 40% to 80% of opioid patients and may led to cessation of the treatment. PAMORAs are μ-receptor opioid antagonists specifically developed so that they have very limited ability to cross the blood-brain barrier and thus they are able to antagonize peripheral but not central μ-opioid receptors. PAMORAs are designed to have no effect on the analgesic benefits of opioid pain relievers but to relieve but antagonizing the effects of the opioid in the gastrointestinal system. The three main PAMORAS are methyltrexone (oral or parenteral), naldemedine (oral only), and naloxegol (oral only). Clinical studies demonstrate the safety and efficacy of these agents for alleviating constipation without diminishing the analgesic effect of opioid therapy. The aim of this narrative review to update the current status of PAMORAs for treating OIC in terms of safety and efficacy.

Naldemedine-induced Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome in a Patient with Breast Cancer without Brain Metastasis

Opioid-induced-constipation (OIC) can be treated by naldemedine and other peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORA) via a novel mechanism. We describe the case of a 52-year-old female outpatient who developed OIC while receiving oxycodone for pain due to cancer with multiple bone metastases. Although she did not have brain metastasis, opioid withdrawal syndrome (OWS) developed after taking naldemedine orally. Her Clinical Opiate-Withdrawal Score (COWS) was 19 (moderate symptoms). However, she recovered from OWS on intravenous fentanyl and a continuous infusion of oxycodone. She did not develop OWS thereafter and was discharged two days after recovery.

Safety and efficacy of naldemedine in cancer patients with opioid-induced constipation: a pooled, subgroup analysis of two randomised controlled studies

Objective

This post hoc, pooled, subgroup analysis of two randomised studies evaluated baseline characteristics that may influence the efficacy and safety of naldemedine in patients with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and cancer.

Methods

Data for patients who received 0.2 mg naldemedine or placebo were pooled from randomised, placebo-controlled, phase IIb and phase III studies. Proportions of spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) responders and patients with diarrhoea were assessed for each treatment group. For the patient subgroups with or without possible blood–brain barrier (BBB) disruptions, changes in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) scores were assessed.

Results

A total of 307 patients were included in this analysis (naldemedine: n=155; placebo: n=152). The pooled proportion of SBM responders was 73.5% with naldemedine versus 35.5% with placebo. There was a significant increase in the proportion of SBM responders with naldemedine versus placebo (38.0% (95% CI 27.6% to 48.4%); p<0.0001). Greater proportions of SBM responders and patients who experienced diarrhoea were observed with naldemedine versus placebo in all subgroups. Changes from baseline in NRS and COWS scores were similar with naldemedine or placebo in patients with or without brain metastases.

Conclusions

Although not powered to detect statistically significant differences in treatment effect among subgroups, this study demonstrated that naldemedine appeared to benefit patients with OIC and cancer, irrespective of baseline characteristics, and did not seem to affect analgesia or withdrawal–even in patients with potential BBB disruptions. Baseline characteristics did not appear to affect the incidence of diarrhoea in patients who received naldemedine.

Trial registration numbers

JapicCTI-111510 and JapicCTI-132340.

Pharmacologic effects of naldemedine, a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, in in vitro and in vivo models of opioid-induced constipation

BACKGROUND

Naldemedine (S-297995) is a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist developed as a once-daily oral drug for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in adults with chronic noncancer or cancer pain. This study characterized the pharmacological effects of naldemedine in vitro and in vivo.

METHODS

The binding affinity and antagonist activity of naldemedine against recombinant human μ-, δ-, and κ-opioid receptors were assayed in vitro. Pharmacologic effects of naldemedine were investigated using animal models of morphine-induced inhibition of small and large intestinal transit, castor oil-induced diarrhea, antinociception, and morphine withdrawal.

KEY RESULTS

Naldemedine showed potent binding affinity and antagonist activities for recombinant human μ-, δ-, and κ-opioid receptors. Naldemedine significantly reduced opioid-induced inhibition of small intestinal transit (0.03-10 mg kg^-1 ; P < 0.05) and large intestinal transit (0.3-1 μmol L^-1 ; P < 0.05). Naldemedine (0.03-1 mg kg^-1 ) pretreatment significantly reversed the inhibition of castor oil-induced diarrhea by subcutaneous morphine (P < 0.01). Naldemedine (1-30 mg kg^-1 ) pretreatment (1 or 2 hours) did not alter the analgesic effects of morphine in a model measuring the latency of a rat to flick its tail following thermal stimulation. However, a significant delayed reduction of the analgesic effect of morphine was seen with higher doses of naldemedine (10-30 mg kg^-1 ). Some centrally mediated and peripherally mediated withdrawal signs in morphine-dependent rats were seen with naldemedine doses ≥3 and ≥0.3 mg kg^-1 , respectively.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Naldemedine displayed potent binding affinity to, and antagonistic activity against, μ-, δ-, and κ-opioid receptors. Naldemedine tempered OIC in vivo without compromising opioid analgesia.

The Influence of Renal or Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Naldemedine

Naldemedine is a peripherally acting μ‐opioid‐receptor antagonist for the treatment of opioid‐induced constipation. Two phase 1 single‐dose studies investigated the pharmacokinetics and safety of a 0.2‐mg oral dose of naldemedine in subjects with renal impairment (mild, n = 9; moderate, n = 9; severe, n = 6; and end‐stage renal disease, n = 8) or hepatic impairment (mild or moderate, n = 8 each) and demographically matched healthy subjects with normal renal and hepatic function (n = 8, both studies). Pharmacokinetic assessments indicate that dose adjustments for naldemedine are not necessary for subjects with any degree of renal impairment or for subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. In subjects with renal impairment compared with healthy subjects with normal renal function, the geometric mean ratios of naldemedine area under the concentration‐time curve (AUC_0‐inf) ranged from 82.8% (90%CI 69.5% to 98.6%) to 137.8% (90%CI 114.0% to 166.5%). Renal clearance decreased with reduced renal function (normal function 1.3 L/h; mild impairment 1.1 L/h; moderate impairment 1.0 L/h; severe impairment 0.5 L/h), and only 2.7% of naldemedine was removed by hemodialysis. In subjects with hepatic impairment compared with healthy subjects with normal hepatic function, the geometric mean ratio of AUC_0‐inf ranged from 82.8% (90%CI 65.7% to 104.5%) to 105.2% (90%CI 83.4% to 132.6%). Naldemedine was well tolerated in both healthy subjects and subjects with renal or hepatic impairment, and reported adverse events were generally consistent with the known safety profile.

A meta-analysis of naldemedine for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a common adverse effect in patients under long-term opioid therapy. Naldemedine is a novel peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists being developed for the treatment of OIC without affecting central analgesia. This meta-analysis is to assess the current evidence for efficacy and safety of naldemedine for the treatment of OIC. Areas covered: We searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, 'ISRCTN Register' and'ClinicalTrials.gov' (up to Aug 2018). Our final review included five randomized clinical trials (1751 participants in total), three trials observed naldemedine for the treatment of OIC in non-cancer patients and two trials in cancer patients. A Random Effects model was used for all comparisons. Subgroup analyses for the following subgroups were carried out: naldemedine 0.1 mg; 0.2 mg; 0.4 mg; cancer patients; non-cancer patients. Expert opinion: Naldemedine improved the proportion of responders and spontaneous bowel movements frequency. The incidence of serious adverse effects (AEs) in naldemedine group was higher than placebo, especially in cancer patient subgroup. The AEs occurred in participants with naldemedine were mild to moderate and well tolerated during treatment. The results of this network meta-analysis will guide the future researchers in evaluating naldemedine for the treatment of OIC.

Peripherally Acting μ-Opioid Receptor Antagonists for the Treatment of Opioid-Related Side Effects: Mechanism of Action and Clinical Implications

Opioid receptors are distributed throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems and on many nonneuronal cells. Therefore, opioid administration induces effects beyond analgesia. In the enteric nervous system (ENS), stimulation of µ-opioid receptors triggers several inhibitory responses that can culminate in opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD) and its most common side effect, opioid-induced constipation (OIC). OIC negatively affects patients' quality of life (QOL), ability to work, and pain management. Although laxatives are a common first-line OIC therapy, most have limited efficacy and do not directly antagonize opioid effects on the ENS. Peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) with limited ability to cross the blood-brain barrier have been developed. The PAMORAs approved by the U S Food and Drug Administration for OIC are subcutaneous and oral methylnaltrexone, oral naloxegol, and oral naldemedine. Although questions of cost-effectiveness and relative efficacy versus laxatives remain, PAMORAs can mitigate OIC and improve patient QOL. PAMORAS may also have applications beyond OIC, including reducing the increased cardiac risk or potential tumorigenic effects of opioids. This review discusses the burden of OIC and OBD, reviews the mechanism of action of new OIC therapies, and highlights other potential opioid-related side effects mediated by peripheral opioid receptors in the context of new OIC therapies.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response Relationships of Naldemedine

Purpose

To characterize population pharmacokinetic (PK) of naldemedine, to identify factors which influence naldemedine PK, and to evaluate their clinical relevancy based on exposure-response relationships.

Methods

A population PK model was developed with pooled naldemedine concentrations from healthy subjects, patients with chronic non-cancer pain and opioid-induced constipation (OIC), and cancer patients with OIC. Exposure-response analyses were performed with efficacy (responder or non-responder) and safety (occurrence of gastrointestinal disorders or not) data in phase 2b and phase 3 studies.

Results

Naldemedine plasma concentrations were adequately described by a 2-compartment model with first-order absorption and absorption lag time. The final model included the effects of age, creatinine clearance, race, and gender on apparent total clearance; the effects of body weight, health status, and food condition on apparent volume of central compartment; and the effect of age on first-order rate of absorption. When subjects took 0.2 mg of naldemedine once daily, the probability of spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) responders was predicted to be approximately 50%, while that of severe gastrointestinal disorders was predicted to be less than 3%. The influence of the covariates on PK was not considered clinically significant because similar efficacy and safety were expected based on the exposure-response analysis.

Conclusions

The covariates are identified in the population PK analysis; however, no dose-adjustment is required for them based on the exposure-response analysis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11095-018-2501-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Randomized phase III and extension studies: efficacy and impacts on quality of life of naldemedine in subjects with opioid-induced constipation and cancer

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of naldemedine (a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist) for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in subjects with cancer was demonstrated in the primary report of a phase III, double-blind study (COMPOSE-4) and its open-label extension (COMPOSE-5). The primary end point, the proportion of spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) responders, was met. Here, we report results from secondary end points, including quality of life (QOL) assessments from these studies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In COMPOSE-4, eligible adults with OIC and cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive once-daily oral naldemedine 0.2 mg (n = 97) or placebo (n = 96) for 2 weeks, and those who continued on to COMPOSE-5 received naldemedine for 12 weeks (n = 131). Secondary assessments in COMPOSE-4 included the proportion of complete SBM (CSBM) responders, SBM or CSBM responders by week, and subjects with ≥1 SBM or CSBM within 24 h postinitial dose. Changes from baseline in the frequency of SBMs or CSBMs per week were assessed at weeks 1 and 2. Time to the first SBM or CSBM postinitial dose was also evaluated. In both studies, QOL impact was evaluated by Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM) and PAC-QOL questionnaires.

RESULTS

Naldemedine improved bowel function for all secondary efficacy assessments versus placebo (all P ≤ 0.0002). The timely onset of naldemedine activity versus placebo was evidenced by median time to the first SBM (4.7 h versus 26.6 h) and CSBM (24.0 h versus 218.5 h) postinitial dose (all P < 0.0001). In COMPOSE-4, significant differences between groups were observed with the PAC-SYM stool domain (P = 0.045) and PAC-QOL dissatisfaction domain (P = 0.015). In COMPOSE-5, significant improvements from baseline were observed for overall and individual domain scores of PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Naldemedine provided effective and timely symptomatic relief from OIC and improved the QOL of subjects with OIC and cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: www.ClinicalTrials.jp: JAPIC-CTI-132340 (COMPOSE-4) and JAPIC-CTI-132342 (COMPOSE-5).

Long-term use of naldemedine in the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic noncancer pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

The long-term safety of naldemedine, a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, was evaluated in patients with opioid-induced constipation and chronic noncancer pain in a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study. Eligible adults who could be on a routine laxative regimen were randomized 1:1 to receive once-daily oral naldemedine 0.2 mg (n = 623) or placebo (n = 623). The primary endpoint was summary measures of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). Additional endpoints included opioid withdrawal on the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale and the Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale, pain intensity on Numeric Rating Scale, frequency of bowel movements, and constipation-related symptoms and quality of life on the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms and Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life scales, respectively. Treatment-emergent AEs (naldemedine, 68.4% vs placebo, 72.1%; difference: -3.6% [95% confidence interval: -8.7 to 1.5]) and treatment-emergent AEs leading to study discontinuation (6.3% vs 5.8%; difference: 0.5% [-2.2 to 3.1)] were reported for similar proportions of patients. Diarrhea was reported more frequently with naldemedine (11.0%) vs placebo (5.3%; difference: 5.6% [2.6-8.6]). There were no meaningful differences between groups in opioid withdrawal or pain intensity. Sustained significant improvements in bowel movement frequency and overall constipation-related symptoms and quality of life were observed with naldemedine (P ≤ 0.0001 vs placebo at all time points). Naldemedine was generally well tolerated for 52 weeks and did not interfere with opioid-mediated analgesia or precipitate opioid withdrawal. Naldemedine significantly increased bowel movement frequency, improved symptomatic burden of opioid-induced constipation, and increased patients' quality of life vs placebo.

Drugs for Treating Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

CONTEXT

Opioid-induced constipation is a common problem associated with chronic use of opioid analgesics.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare available interventions for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation, using principles of network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating drugs used in opioid-induced constipation. Number of patients with rescue-free bowel movements (RFBM) was the primary outcome, and time for achieving RFBM, adverse events, and changes in the analgesic activity of the opioid analgesics were the secondary outcomes. Inverse variance heterogeneity model was used for direct and mixed treatment comparison analysis. Odds ratio for categorical outcomes and weighted mean difference for numerical outcomes were the effect estimates.

RESULTS

We included a total of 23 studies in the systematic review and 21 in the network meta-analysis. Lubriprostone, prucalopride, naldemedine, naloxegol, alvimopan, subcutaneous, and oral methyl naltrexone were observed to perform better than placebo in terms of RFBM. Additionally, subcutaneous methyl naltrexone was significantly better than lubiprostone, naloxegol, oral methyl naltrexone, and prucalopride. Lubiprostone and naldemedine were associated with increased risks of adverse events. Subcutaneous methyl naltrexone did not significantly affect the analgesia due to background opioid use. Quality of evidence for the comparisons is either low or very low.

CONCLUSION

Subcutaneous methyl naltrexone was found to perform better than other interventions for managing opioid-induced constipation.

Spotlight on naldemedine in the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in adult patients with chronic noncancer pain: design, development, and place in therapy

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is an increasingly prevalent problem in the USA due to the growing use of opioids. A novel class of therapeutics, the peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs), has been developed to mitigate the deleterious effects of opioids in the gastrointestinal tract while maintaining central analgesia and minimizing opioid withdrawal. This review aimed to summarize the literature on naldemedine, the third PAMORA to gain US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the treatment of OIC in adults with chronic noncancer pain-related syndromes. Naldemedine has a chemical structure similar to naltrexone, an opioid receptor antagonist, with chemical modifications that limit its ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. Naldemedine was evaluated in two Phase II and three Phase III clinical trials prior to gaining FDA approval. In two pivotal identical Phase III trials, COMPOSE-I (NCT 01965158) and COMPOSE-II (NCT 01993940), patients receiving naldemedine were significantly more likely to respond when compared with placebo (COMPOSE-I: 47.6 vs 34.6%, P=0.002 and COMPOSE-II: 52.5 vs 33.6%, P<0.0001). The most frequent adverse events were abdominal pain (8%) and diarrhea (7%) - rates similar to the other PAMORAs. Based on the available data, naldemedine appears to be an effective and safe drug for the treatment of OIC in adults with chronic noncancer pain.

Phase 1, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies on the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Naldemedine in Healthy Volunteers

Naldemedine (S-297995) is a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation, a common side effect of opioid therapy. We determined the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profiles of oral naldemedine in healthy volunteers in 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 studies. In the single ascending dose study, subjects received a single dose of naldemedine (0.1-100 mg; n = 42) or placebo (n = 14). In the multiple ascending dose study, subjects received once-daily naldemedine (3-30 mg; n = 27) or placebo (n = 9) for 10 days. On day 1 of the single ascending dose studies and day 10 of the multiple ascending dose studies, respectively, the maximum plasma concentration levels of naldemedine were 1.98 to 2510 ng/mL and 73.8 to 700 ng/mL, peaked at 0.5 hours and 0.5 to 0.75 hours, and the fraction excreted in urine was 15.9% to 20.5% and 19.7% to 19.1%. There were no major safety or tolerability concerns even at naldemedine doses 150 to 500 times the therapeutic dose of 0.2 mg. The incidence of adverse events was not dose dependent. Gastrointestinal adverse events occurred more frequently with naldemedine vs placebo, and all of these were considered treatment related. Overall, naldemedine was rapidly absorbed, and no safety or tolerability issues were noted at the doses evaluated.