Tapentadol has μ-opioid receptor stimulating and noradrenaline reuptake inhibiting properties, and should be effective for neuropathic pain (NP). However, the efficacy of tapentadol for NP in cancer patients is unclear. Ashiya Municipal Hospital (Hyogo, Japan) enrolled five groups of Japanese cancer patients between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019. Patients with NP were administered tapentadol (n 29), methadone (n 32), oxycodone (n 20), fentanyl (n 26), or hydromorphone (n 20). The primary endpoint was the difference in the verbal rating scale (VRS) scores between days 0 and 7. The secondary endpoint was the tolerability of each opioid. Before administering opioids among the five groups, there was no significant difference in the VRS score (p 0.99). The mean reduction in the VRS score on day 7 was significantly greater in the tapentadol group than in the oxycodone group (p 0.0024) and was larger than that of the methadone, fentanyl, and hydromorphone groups. Regarding safety, the discontinuation rate in the tapentadol group was the lowest of all groups (tapentadol vs. methadone vs. oxycodone vs. fentanyl vs. hydromorphone, 0.0% vs. 6.3% vs. 5.0% vs. 3.8% vs. 10.0%, respectively). This study suggests that tapentadol could be efficacious for cancer patients with NP, and a preferred option in cases that require immediate dose adjustment or for those at high risk for adverse effects. However, the pain intensity was evaluated without pain assessment scales specific to NP. Thus, we think that it is desirable to validate our findings using assessment scales, such as the painDETECT questionnaire in future.
Background Cisplatin (CDDP)-induced nephrotoxicity is the most important complication of CDDP treatment. 5-Hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) are widely used to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, in patients with the triple antiemetic (neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, 5-HT3RA, and dexamethasone) therapy, the advantage of palonosetron in comparison with other 5-HT3RAs on CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity and CINV remains unclear. In the present study, we investigated the effect of palonosetron on CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity and CINV in patients with the triple antiemetic therapy by a retrospective cohort study and a pharmacovigilance analysis. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the effect of 5-HT3RAs on the development of nephrotoxicity and CINV in 110 patients who received CDDP, fluorouracil, and triple antiemetic therapy for the treatment of esophageal cancer. Moreover, the effect of 5-HT3RAs on CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity was validated in patients with the triple antiemetic therapy using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database. Results In a retrospective study, the incidence of nephrotoxicity (≥ grade 1) in patients receiving palonosetron (18%) was significantly lower than that in patients receiving ramosetron (another 5-HT3RA) (36%, p = 0.044). Moreover, severe nephrotoxicity ≥ grade 3 was observed in one patient treated with ramosetron, whereas hematological toxicity was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.553). Furthermore, the incidence rate of CINV within 120 h following CDDP administration in patients treated with palonosetron (18%) was significantly lower than that in patients receiving ramosetron (39%, p = 0.026). JADER database analyses revealed that the reporting odds ratio of palonosetron for CDDP-induced acute kidney injury was 0.282 (95% confidence interval: 0.169–0.472). Conclusions The findings of the present study suggested a greater potential of palonosetron against CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity and CINV than other 5-HT3RAs in patients with the triple antiemetic therapy.
ObjectivesThe initiation of peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) should be considered 2 weeks after conventional laxatives have failed to achieve an adequate response, and affected patients should be evaluated every 2 weeks thereafter. However, this guidance is difficult to implement in acute care hospitals. This study aimed to examine how naldemedine (PAMORA) should be introduced in combination with other laxatives in the acute care setting.MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated 93 inpatients who received at least four doses of naldemedine. We investigated changes in the average daily defecation counts during the first 7 days after compared with before naldemedine administration and the incidence of diarrhoea.ResultsDaily defecation counts during the first 7 days after compared with before naldemedine administration were greater in both the naldemedine, magnesium oxide (MgO) and another laxative group, and in the naldemedine and another laxative other than MgO group than in the naldemedine only group. The incidence rates of diarrhoea were significantly higher in the naldemedine, MgO, and another laxative group, and in the naldemedine and another laxative other than MgO group than in the naldemedine only group.ConclusionsThe introduction of naldemedine alone or in combination with MgO should be considered.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.