Brought to You by SEPTEMBER 2013 REPORT Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients With Advanced Illness of pain related to tumor enlargeoderate to severe pain is a ment, metastasis or, as another common clinical problem Faculty example, neuropathic pain in the among patients with advanced illsetting of diabetes mellitus. Other ness, particularly in the palliative Darren Brenner, MD times, the pain may be iatrogenic care setting. Although cancer pain Assistant Professor of Gastroenterology in etiology, such as complicahas historically received the most and Hepatology tions related to radiation therapy attention, patients with AIDS, Northwestern University Feinberg for the treatment of cancers, or advanced congestive heart failure, School of Medicine neuropathy induced by antiretroand advanced lung disease also Chicago, Illinois viral or chemotherapeutic agents. commonly experience pain.1 Unfortunately, the prevalence of “When we look at patients with Joseph Pergolizzi, MD pain is quite high in the palliative advanced illness, pain is one of Adjunct Associate Professor of care setting.” the most prevalent symptoms Pharmacology In fact, a meta-analysis of that patients report,” said Joseph Temple University School of Medicine studies published during the Pergolizzi, MD, adjunct associate Philadelphia, Pennsylvania past 40 years found that 64% professor of pharmacology, Temof patients with advanced-stage ple University School of Medicine cancer reported significant pain in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. in their daily lives.2 Another review, which included patients “This pain can arise due to the illness itself, such as in cases M Indication ® RELISTOR is indicated for the treatment of opioidinduced constipation in patients with advanced illness who are receiving palliative care, when response to laxative therapy has not been sufficient. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Contraindications RELISTOR is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstructions. Please see Important Safety Information throughout and brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. Supported by REPORT with advanced illnesses such as cancer, AIDS, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and renal disease reported that the prevalence of pain across 28 studies ranged between 34% and 96%.3 Moreover, the prevalence of pain among patients receiving hospice care may be as high as 90%.4 “The severity of pain has an important influence in the choice of treatment strategy,” Dr. Pergolizzi explained. “When patients report moderate to severe pain, that’s where we really rely on the opioids. In fact, escalating doses of opioids are oftentimes the only effective option for pain control in advanced disease.” This notion is endorsed by guidelines from several major societies in the United States, such as the American College of Physicians and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, which recommend that opioids should be used for the treatment of moderate to severe pain in patients with advanced illness.5,6 Opioids, however, are associated with numerous adverse events (AEs), including nausea, sedation, pruritus, and respiratory depression.5,7 Perhaps the most common opioid AEs are those affecting the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, including opioidinduced constipation (OIC).8-10 The following report provides an overview of OIC, including a review of its epidemiology, risk factors, and how its pathophysiology and management differ from that of primary constipation, as well as a review of data for recently approved options for the management of this condition. Pathophysiology of OIC Darren Brenner, MD, assistant professor of gastroenterology and hepatology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois, noted that, “in terms of pathophysiology, OIC is quite distinct from other forms of constipation.” For example, physiologic constipation results from extrinsic, non–disease-related factors that affect bowel function, such as decreased physical activity and inadequate dietary fiber and fluid intake. These factors may cause decreased bowel motility and increased transit time, which allows more time for fluid resorption in the intestinal lumen, leading to hard and dry stools.9 In other cases, constipation may result from pathologic conditions in the setting of underlying GI, nervous system, or metabolic disorders that interfere with GI motility or fluid absorption/secretion.9,11 “In contrast, OIC is mediated by the effect of opioids on opioid receptors that are located throughout the GI tract and the enteric nervous system,” said Dr. Brenner. The 3 major opioid receptors in the enteric nervous system are the μ-, γ-, and κ-subtypes.12 The μ-receptors are widely distributed in the GI tract submucosa as well as the ileal mucosa, where they influence ion transport changes.12 The primary mediator involved in the development of OIC is the μ-opioid receptor; inhibition of excitatory and inhibitory neurotransmitters occurs when opioid agonists bind to this receptor, causing multiple effects that contribute to OIC.7,13,14 These include inhibition of gastric emptying, reduction of mucosal secretions, and a decrease in peristalsis throughout the GI tract, thereby delaying transit.14,15 Furthermore, opioids stimulate non-propulsive motility, intestinal segmentation and tone, and increased pyloric and ileocecal sphincter tone. Opioids also result in increased absorption of fluids, mainly by delayed transit—increasing contact time for absorption—and by stimulating mucosal sensory receptors that activate a reflex arc that facilitates further fluid absorption.14 All of these pathophysiologic processes conspire to result in hard, dense stools and decreased motility, resulting in significant constipation14 that may be refractory to traditional strategies used to alleviate constipation.15 “Patients with advanced illness also may have autonomic dysfunction leading to GI motility disorders. For example, HIV affects local humoral immunity and causes motility disturbances via its influence on autonomic nerves,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. “Using opioids for any treatment [in patients with advanced illness] is going to be detrimental to the GI tract given the plethora of μ-opioid receptors located across the entire intestinal lining,” said Dr. Brenner. “However, treatment guidelines still rely on opioids for the treatment of moderate to severe pain, and I don’t see that changing any time soon. So the best thing we can do is develop strategies to overcome adverse GI events related to their use.” Nonselective opioid-receptor antagonists such as naloxone and naltrexone target the μ-, γ-, and κ-opioid receptors, which led to interest in their use for opioid therapy.15 However, both agents can cross the blood–brain barrier and antagonize receptors that mediate the analgesic effect of opioids.12,16 Important Safety Information RELISTOR ® (methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been 2 reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (ie, cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (eg, stomach, duodenum, colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR REPORT “The last thing that we want to do in the palliative care setting is to reduce the analgesic effects of our opioids, because our primary goal is to reduce pain in these patients,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. Epidemiology and Consequences of OIC OIC is an anticipated side effect of opioid therapy. Its overall relevance to the clinical community continues to increase, mainly because of the rising therapeutic use of opioids.17 For example, OIC rates in patients receiving cancer treatment and opioids can range from 69% to 90%,18,19 and studies of patients with advanced cancer who are receiving hospice care report rates as high as 87%.20 Additionally, among individuals with advanced illnesses other than cancer who are receiving opioid therapy, the prevalence of opioid-induced GI AEs approaches 90%.21 “In the palliative care patient with advanced disease, we are more aggressive in the use of opioids to reduce pain with the goal of comfort,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. “Although we try to balance the role of analgesic-related side effects, oftentimes, relief of pain is more important for these patients. As such, we typically use higher dose of opioids, which results in more adverse effects.” Risk factors for OIC include advanced age, opioid type/ strength, and advanced illness (eg, cancer, AIDS, or cardiovascular disease).18,20,21 Furthermore, the risk for OIC increases with relative immobility, dehydration, and altered nutritional intake, all of which are common in patients with advanced illnesses, particularly in the palliative care setting.21 Although patients may slowly acquire a tolerance to opioid-related side effects such as nausea or sedation, OIC may continue unabated throughout treatment.21 Dr. Pergolizzi said that there are several notable consequences of OIC. “First, OIC can result in other GI symptoms, including nausea and vomiting and a decreased ability to take in oral medications and nutrients. Second, if patients have no remedy to relieve the symptoms and complications of OIC as an outpatient, they really have no other option than to come to the emergency department to be evaluated. In some cases, the symptomatology and consequences of OIC are sufficiently severe to warrant hospitalization for more aggressive interventions,” he said. “When you consider the patient with advanced illness, especially those in the palliative care setting, they would really rather not be hospitalized provided they have some option to adequately relieve OIC at home.” The consequences of OIC are diverse and significant. Clinical manifestations include abdominal pain, distension, and nausea and vomiting.9 When left untreated, OIC may lead to inadequate absorption of oral medications, fecal impaction, hemorrhoids, bowel obstruction, and intestinal perforation.9 “There is a vicious circle that exists between opioid use for the relief of pain and the subsequent pain and discomfort that can result from the development of secondary constipation,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. “Specifically, patients are given opioids to relieve the primary pain related to their advanced illness but end up developing OIC, which can, itself, be a painful condition. [When laxative agents provide insufficient relief,] patients are then faced with the choice of either refraining from further opioid therapy to relieve OIC, in which case the pain from their primary condition is not adequately treated, or taking larger doses of opioids and potentially worsening the pain associated with OIC.” Treatment of OIC in Advanced Illness Physiologic constipation is typically managed through a combination of behavioral strategies and the use of agents designed to increase stool bulk, improve intestinal motility, and/ or aid the passage of stools through softening agents.9 Supportive strategies include increased hydration and improved patient mobilization—which can be difficult for patients with advanced illness—along with addressing the etiologic triggers of constipation.9 Laxatives are the first-line therapeutic option for OIC, and the various classes of laxative agents used to relieve physiologic mechanisms of constipation are summarized in Table 1.22,23 However, data from clinical trials suggest that conventional laxatives (eg, over-the-counter laxatives, polyethylene glycol, lactulose, magnesium citrate) may not offer adequate symptom relief for some patients.15,21 As reviewed in the section on the pathophysiology of different types of constipation, OIC in advanced illness is unique from other forms of constipation. “When we look at laxatives Important Safety Information (continued) and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Safety and efficacy of RELISTOR have not been established in pediatric patients. The most common adverse reactions reported with RELISTOR compared with placebo in clinical trials were abdominal pain (28.5%), flatulence (13.3%), nausea (11.5%), dizziness (7.3%), diarrhea (5.5%), and hyperhidrosis (6.7%). Please see Important Safety Information throughout and brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. 3 REPORT Table 1. Conventional Laxative Options for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Advanced Illness Type Attributes Examples Side Effects/Complications Bulk laxatives Dietary fiber; causes water retention in the colon and increases stool bulk Psyllium husk, methylcellulose Increased gas; risk for bowel obstruction in patients with strictures Osmotic laxatives Salt content retains fluid retention and increased intestinal secretions Sorbitol, lactulose, polyethylene glycol, magnesium citrate Electrolyte imbalances; increased gas, nausea, and dehydration Stool softeners Decrease surface tension to lubricate and soften fecal matter Dioctyl sodium, calcium sulfosuccinate Require adequate fluid intake, useless in patients with compromised bowel motility Stimulants Increase colonic motility and electrolyte transport; stimulate fluid secretion Senna, cascara, bisacodyl Electrolyte imbalances; abdominal pain, nausea, and colonic dysmotility From references 22 and 23. and stool softeners, we see dramatic variability in terms of the response to such agents across our patient populations. A lot of that has to do with the specific mechanisms of constipation, particularly in patients with OIC,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. Another strategy that has been recommended to relieve AEs while maintaining analgesia is that of opioid rotation.5,24 This tactic is predicated on the fact that patients react differently to various types of opioids, which implies both incomplete crosstolerance and distinct variations in their pharmacodynamics and opioid-receptor binding affinities.24,25 However, this strategy has shown only moderate benefits in the reduction of OIC and other related AEs. Narabayashi and colleagues investigated the safety of an opioid rotation in cancer patients and found that side effects commonly recurred after switching from one agent to another.26 There also are therapeutic equivalence concerns when switching from one opioid to another. Current recommendations are based on studies conducted within different patient populations that analyzed dose equivalency, not pain management.24,25 The relative ineffectiveness of traditional strategies for OIC has prompted research and development of targeted therapies, as some patients require additional therapeutic options. Important Safety Information RELISTOR ® (methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been 4 reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (ie, cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (eg, stomach, duodenum, colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR REPORT Blood-Brain Barrier Opioid RELISTOR Mu-opioid μ-opioid receptor receptor Figure 1. Relistor inhibits opioids from m binding with μ-receptors in tissues such as the gastrointes gastrointestinal tract. “Until recently, the only agents available were ere those being used to treat the more typical types of constipation—bulknstipation—bulking agents, osmotic and stimulant laxatives,” said Dr. Brenner. “Now we’re moving into an era where we’re developing [second-line] agents that focus on the precise pathophysiologic mechanisms of OIC to provide specific and effective antidotes.” Peripheral Opioid-Receptor Antagonists The limitations of nonselective opioid antagonists have prompted the development of agents that do not cross the blood–brain barrier. These agents ideally would avoid the of opioidanalgesic-dampening and opioid-withdrawal effects ef receptor antagonists while maintaining therapeutic efficacy for therape the alleviation of OIC.15 N-methylation of naltrexone results in a charged derivative, methylnaltrexone (Relistor, Salix Pharmaceuticals), which has restricted ability to cross the blood–brain barrier in humans because of its polarity and low lipid solubility.27 Relistor antagonizes μ-opioid receptors, which reverses opioid-induced delays on GI motility in a dose-dependent manner.27 Figure 1 shows Relistor blocking opioids from binding to μ-receptors within the GI tract. Important Safety Information (continued) and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Safety and efficacy of RELISTOR have not been established in pediatric patients. The most common adverse reactions reported with RELISTOR compared with placebo in clinical trials were abdominal pain (28.5%), flatulence (13.3%), nausea (11.5%), dizziness (7.3%), diarrhea (5.5%), and hyperhidrosis (6.7%). Please see Important Safety Information throughout and brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. 5 REPORT Placebo 80 RELISTOR 0.15 mg/kg 70 62% a 58% a Patients, % 60 RELISTOR 0.30 mg/kg 48% a 50 40 30 20 16% 14% 10 0 (n=52) (n=47) (n=55) Study 1 (n=71) (n=62) Study 2 Figure 2. Laxation response rates within 4 hours of the first dose during clinical trials of Relistor in patients with advanced illness. a P<0.0001 vs placebo From reference 27. The efficacy and safety of Relistor for OIC in patients with advanced illness were investigated in 2 clinical trials (Figure 2).27 Slatkin and colleagues conducted a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that compared a single subcutaneous injection of Relistor (0.15 mg/kg or 0.30 mg/kg) with placebo for OIC.21 The study included 154 patients with advanced illness such as cancer or other end-stage conditions (eg, cardiovascular disease, HIV/AIDS) who were receiving palliative care.21 Participants had received opioid therapy for at least 3 days before study randomization and had not experienced a bowel movement within 48 hours of the first dose.21 Within 4 hours of treatment, laxation response rates for Relistor doses of 0.15 mg/kg (n=47) and 0.30 mg/kg (n=55) were 61.7% and 58.2%, respectively, compared with 14% for placebo (P<0.0001). In fact, roughly half of the Relistor responders defecated within 30 minutes of receiving the agent.21 Within 24 hours, laxation rates remained steady for 0.15 mg/kg Relistor (68.1%) and 0.30 mg/kg Relistor (63.6%) compared with placebo (26.9%).21 The investigators reported comparable efficacy between both doses of Relistor, but patients in the 0.30 mg/kg treatment arm had higher rates of abdominal pain (38.2% vs 27.7%).21 Important Safety Information RELISTOR ® (methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been 6 reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (ie, cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (eg, stomach, duodenum, colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR REPORT Table 2. Common Adverse Reactions Associated With Relistor During Clinical Trials in Patients With Advanced Illness RELISTOR a (n=165) Placebo (n=123) Pts (%) Pts (%) Abdominal pain 47 (28.5) 12 (9.8) Flatulence 22 (13.3) 7 (5.7) Nausea 19 (11.5) 6 (4.9) Dizziness 12 (7.3) 3 (2.4) Diarrhea 9 (5.5) 3 (2.4) Hyperhidrosis 11 (6.7) 8 (6.5) Adverse Reaction a Includes doses of 0.075, 0.15, and 0.30 mg/kg From reference 27. Other common AEs related to Relistor during this trial in the 0.15 mg/kg and 0.30 mg/kg treatment arms were flatulence (12.8% and 14.5%), nausea (4.3% and 14.5%), and dizziness (4.3% and 9.1%).21 In a similar study by Thomas and colleagues, 133 patients who had received opioids for at least 2 weeks and developed OIC that was refractory to the use of laxatives were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous Relistor (0.15 mg/kg; n=63) or placebo (n=71) every other day for 2 weeks.28 Participants were recruited from palliative care settings and had advanced illness such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, COPD, emphysema, Alzheimer’s disease, or dementia.28 The proportion of patients who experienced laxation within 4 hours was significantly higher in the Relistor group than in the placebo group (48% vs 15%, respectively; P<0.0001).28 Additionally, the median time to laxation after the first dose was significantly shorter in the Relistor group than in the placebo group (6.3 vs 48 hours, respectively; P<0.002).28 The most common AEs related to Relistor during this trial were abdominal pain (17%), flatulence (13%), nausea (11%), increased body temperature (8%), and dizziness (8%).28 The study by Thomas and colleagues also included an open-label extension in which patients received Relistor as Important Safety Information (continued) and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Safety and efficacy of RELISTOR have not been established in pediatric patients. The most common adverse reactions reported with RELISTOR compared with placebo in clinical trials were abdominal pain (28.5%), flatulence (13.3%), nausea (11.5%), dizziness (7.3%), diarrhea (5.5%), and hyperhidrosis (6.7%). Please see Important Safety Information throughout and brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. 7 REPORT needed each day for 3 months. A total of 89 patients entered this phase of the trial (47 from the Relistor group, 42 from the placebo group).28 By the end of the 3-month extension, patients from the placebo group improved their rescuefree response rates from 11% to 52%; patients from the initial Relistor group improved their response rates from 45% to 57%.28 Median time to laxation for all patients was less than 45 minutes.28 The most common AEs during this phase were abdominal pain (30%), progression of malignant neoplasm (24%), nausea (21%), and vomiting (20%). Serious AEs related to Relistor were muscle spasms (1 patient) and exacerbated pain (1 patient); 32 deaths occurred, with all attributed to underlying disease.28 In both the Slatkin and Thomas studies, participants were permitted to continue their previously initiated laxative therapy, just not within 4 hours of study treatments. Figure 2 provides laxation rates from the 2 clinical trials of Relistor within 4 hours of the first dose.27 “In the 2 pivotal trials, the clinical benefit associated with the fact that methylnaltrexone does not cross the blood–brain barrier was confirmed by observations showing there was no analgesic-stealing effect,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. Indeed, in both trials there was no change in pain scores or evidence of central-opioid withdrawal in response to Relistor.21,28 Abdominal pain and flatulence were the most common AEs attributed to Relistor during the 2 clinical trials (Table 2).27 A post hoc analysis of abdominal pain rates during these studies found that it consisted primarily of abdominal cramping and did not affect patients’ overall evaluation of pain.29 These AEs were mostly mild to moderate in severity and did not affect patients’ global evaluation of pain. The incidence of abdominal pain in Relistor-treated patients was highest following the first dose and it decreased with subsequent doses.29 Of note, rare postmarketing cases of GI perforation have been reported in association with Relistor, particularly in patients with abnormal structural integrity in the walls of the GI tract, such as those with cancer, peptic ulcer, or Ogilvie’s syndrome. As a result, the prescribing information includes a warning that Relistor should be used with caution in patients with a known or suspected GI tract lesions.27 On the basis of these trials, in 2008 the FDA approved the use of Relistor for the treatment of OIC in patients with advanced illness who are receiving palliative care, when response to laxative therapy has not been sufficient. 27 Relistor is administered as a subcutaneous injection, and a typical schedule is 1 dose every other day as needed, but not to exceed more than 1 dose in a 24-hour period.27 Use of Relistor beyond 4 months has not been studied. The recommended dose of Relistor is 8 mg for patients who weigh between 38 and 61 kg; 12 mg for patients who weigh between 62 and 114 kg; and 0.15 mg/kg for patients who fall outside of these weight ranges.27 Only patients who require an 8- or 12-mg dose should be prescribed prefilled syringes. No dose adjustment is required in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. In patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance <30 mL/min), dose reductions of Relistor by one half are recommended.27 If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, patients should discontinue therapy with Relistor and consult their physician. If patients develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms, they should discontinue therapy with Relistor and promptly notify their physician. Use of Relistor has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Dr. Pergolizzi views subcutaneous Relistor administration as one of several unique advantages. “The fact that we can administer this agent via the subcutaneous route in patients undergoing palliative care is important, as many of these patients are unable to take in medications by mouth due to nausea, dysphagia, or decreased levels of consciousness. OIC itself can also cause significant nausea and may preclude oral medication intake for some patients,” he said. Treatment Algorithm for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Advanced Illness With the approval of Relistor for the treatment of OIC in patients with advanced illness who are receiving palliative care when laxative therapy has not been sufficient, Drs. Brenner and Pergolizzi discussed the current landscape and clinical management of OIC in patients with advanced illness, including a potential treatment algorithm (Figure 3). “According to the FDA-approved labeling, methylnaltrexone is indicated for the second-line treatment of OIC. Therefore, the first step for patients with OIC will still be a trial of Important Safety Information RELISTOR ® (methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been 8 reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (ie, cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (eg, stomach, duodenum, colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR REPORT OIC in a patient with advanced illness undergoing palliative care ª Trial of oral first-line laxative agent ª Nonresponse or insufficient response ª Relistor Trial Subcutaneous injection every other day, as needed, but no more frequently than 1 dose in a 24-h period Approved doses: • 8 mg for patients weighing 38-61 kg • 12 mg for patients weighing 62-114 kg • 0.15 mg/kg for patients whose weight falls outside of these ranges ª the traditional laxative therapies. For patients who fail to have a response to the traditional agents, you would proceed to methylnaltrexone. The mechanism of action for methylnaltrexone is well-suited for the treatment of OIC, so if the patient describes a clinical history in which they had regular bowel movements then developed constipation after initiation of opioid therapy, I would use methylnaltrexone,” said Dr. Pergolizzi. “Methylnaltrexone is indicated to be used when other laxatives have failed. But if a patient has a clear history of OIC [and hasn’t responded to first-line therapies], I wouldn’t spend a great deal of time switching from one laxative to another before prescribing methylnaltrexone,” said Dr. Brenner. According to Dr. Pergolizzi, determining the success of laxative therapy is, thankfully, not all that difficult. “When prescribing medications for the treatment of OIC, you have an easy, objective end point to follow: Has the patient had symptomatic relief in terms of a bowel movement or not? Methylnaltrexone offers a predictable and rapid response in the majority of patients with OIC,” he said. Conclusion OIC is a highly prevalent side effect of opioid therapy. The pathophysiology of OIC is unique from that of physiologic constipation or constipation due to primary GI, neurologic, or metabolic conditions. Conventional therapies may be ineffective in restoring normal bowel function in patients with OIC. Relistor is an effective second-line therapy and initial prescription option for the treatment of OIC in patients with advanced illness who are receiving palliative care. Nonresponse or insufficient response ª Rescue therapy (ie, enemas, manual disimpaction) Figure 3. Faculty-proposed treatment algorithm for OIC in advanced illness. OIC, opioid-induced constipation Important Safety Information about RELISTOR RELISTOR ® (methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may Important Safety Information (continued) and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Safety and efficacy of RELISTOR have not been established in pediatric patients. The most common adverse reactions reported with RELISTOR compared with placebo in clinical trials were abdominal pain (28.5%), flatulence (13.3%), nausea (11.5%), dizziness (7.3%), diarrhea (5.5%), and hyperhidrosis (6.7%). Please see Important Safety Information throughout and brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. 9 REPORT be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (ie, cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (eg, stomach, duodenum, colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. Safety and efficacy of RELISTOR have not been established in pediatric patients. The most common adverse reactions reported with RELISTOR compared with placebo in clinical trials were abdominal pain (28.5%), flatulence (13.3%), nausea (11.5%), dizziness (7.3%), diarrhea (5.5%), and hyperhidrosis (6.7%). References 8. Glare P, Walsh D, Sheehan D. The adverse effects of morphine: a prospective survey of common symptoms during repeated dosing for chronic cancer pain. Am J Hosp Palliat Med. 2006;23(3):229-235. 9. Mancini I, Bruera E. Constipation in advanced cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 1998;6(4):356-364. 1. 2. van den Beuken-van Everdingen MH, de Rijke JM, Kessels AG, et al. Prevalence of pain in patients with cancer: a systematic review of the past 40 years. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(9):1437-1449. 3. Solano JP, Gomes B, Higginson IJ. A comparison of symptom prevalence in far advanced cancer, AIDS, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, and renal disease. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006;31(1):58-69. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10 Fine PG, Portenoy RK. Opioid therapy in advanced medical illness. In: William Roberts, Colleen Sauber, eds. A Clinical Guide to Opioid Analgesia. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2004:115-120. Kutner JS, Kassner CT, Nowels DE. Symptom prevalence at the end of life: hospice providers’ perceptions. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;21(6):473-480. Swarm R, Abernethy AP, Anghelescu DL, et al; NCCN Adult Cancer Pain. Adult cancer pain. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8(9):1046-1086. Qaseem A, Snow V, Shekelle P, et al; Clinical Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians. Evidence-based interventions to improve the palliative care of pain, dyspnea, and depression at the end of life: a clinical practice guidelines from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(2):141-146. Bader S, Jaroslawski K, Blum HE, Becker G. Opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness: safety and efficacy of methylnaltrexone bromide. Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2011;5:201-211. Please see brief summary of Prescribing Information on page 12. 10. Clemens KE, Klaschik EK. Managing opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness: focus on methylnaltrexone bromide. Ther Clin Risk Manage. 2010;6:77-82. 11. Wingate D, Hongo M, Kellow J, et al. Disorders of gastrointestinal motility: towards a new classification. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2002;(17 suppl):S1-S14. 12. Camilleri M. Opioid-induced constipation: challenges and therapeutic opportunities. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106(5): 835-842. 13. Kurz A, Sessler DI. Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: pathophysiology and potential new therapies. Drugs. 2003;63(7):649-671. 14. De Schepper HU, Cremonini F, Park MI, Camilleri M. Opioids and the gut: pharmacology and current clinical experience. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2004;16(4):383-394. 15. Thomas JR, Cooney GA, Slatkin NE. Palliative care and pain: new strategies for managing opioid bowel dysfunction. J Palliat Med. 2008;(11 suppl 1):S1-S19. 16. Yuan CS, Foss JF, O’Connor M, et al. Methylnaltrexone prevents morphine-induced delay in oral-cecal transit time without affecting analgesia: a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1996;59(4): 469-475. REPORT 17. Manchikanti L, Singh A. Therapeutic opioids: a ten-year perspective on the complexities and complications of the escalating use, abuse, and non-medical use of opioids. Pain Physician. 2008;11(2 suppl):S63-S88. 24. Mercandante S, Casuccio A, Fulfaro F, et al. Switching from morphine to methadone to improve analgesia and tolerability in cancer patients: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(11):2898-2904. 18. Rosti G, Gatti A, Costantini A, et al. Opioid-related bowel dysfunction: prevalence and identification of predictive factors in a large sample of Italian patients on chronic treatment. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2010;14(12):1045-1050. 25. Vissers KP, Besse K, Hans G, et al. Opioid rotation in the management of chronic pain: where is the evidence? Pain Pract. 2010;10(2):85-93. 19. Quigley C. The role of opioids in cancer pain. BMJ. 2005; 331(7520):825-829. 20. Sykes NP. The relationship between opioid use and laxative use in terminally ill cancer patients. Palliat Med. 1998;12(5):375-382. 21. Slatkin N, Thomas J, Lipman AG, et al. Methylnaltrexone for treatment of opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness patients. J Support Oncol. 2009;7(1):39-46. 22. Benyamin R, Trescot AM, Datta S, et al. Opioid complications and side effects. Pain Physician. 2008;11(2 suppl): S105-S120. 23. Schaefer DC, Cheskin LJ. Constipation in the elderly. Am Fam Physician. 1998;58(4):907-914. 26. Narabayashi M, Saijo Y, Takenoshita S, et al; Advisory Committee for Oxycodone Study. Opioid rotation from oral morphine to oral oxycodone in cancer patients with intolerable adverse effects: an open-label trial. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38(4):296-304. 27. Relistor (methylnaltrexone bromide) subcutaneous injection [prescribing information]. Philadelphia, PA: Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2012. 28. Thomas J, Karver S, Cooney GA, et al. Methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(22):2332-2343. 29. Slatkin NE, Lynn R, Su C, et al. Characterization of abdominal pain during methylnaltrexone treatment of opioid-induced constipation in advanced illness: a post hoc analysis of two clinical trials. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011;42(5):754-760. Disclosures: Dr. Brenner reported that he has served as a consultant for Perrigo and has served as a consultant for and on the speakers’ bureau of Salix Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Pergolizzi reported that he has served as a consultant for, on the speakers’ bureau of, and received honorarium from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Purdue Pharma, and Salix Pharmaceuticals. He has also served as a consultant for and received honorarium from Kirax Corporation. Copyright © 2013, McMahon Publishing, 545 West 45th Street, New York, NY 10036. Printed in the USA. All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction, in whole or in part, in any form. REL 13/22 SR1317 Disclaimer: This monograph is designed to be a summary of information. While it is detailed, it is not an exhaustive clinical review. McMahon Publishing, Salix, and the authors neither affirm nor deny the accuracy of the information contained herein. No liability will be assumed for the use of this monograph, and the absence of typographical errors is not guaranteed. Readers are strongly urged to consult any relevant primary literature. 11 Adverse Reactions from all Doses in DoubleBlind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Studies of RELISTOR* The following is a brief summary only; see full Prescribing Information for complete product information. INDICATIONS AND USAGE RELISTOR is indicated for the treatment of opioidinduced constipation in patients with advanced illness who are receiving palliative care, when response to laxative therapy has not been sufficient. Use of RELISTOR beyond four months has not been studied. CONTRAINDICATIONS RELISTOR is contraindicated in patients with known or suspected mechanical gastrointestinal obstruction. WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS Severe or Persistent Diarrhea If severe or persistent diarrhea occurs during treatment, advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and consult their physician. Intestinal Perforation Rare cases of gastrointestinal (GI) perforation have been reported in advanced illness patients with conditions that may be associated with localized or diffuse reduction of structural integrity in the wall of the GI tract (i.e., cancer, peptic ulcer, Ogilvie’s syndrome). Perforations have involved varying regions of the GI tract (e.g., stomach, duodenum, or colon). Use RELISTOR with caution in patients with known or suspected lesions of the GI tract. Advise patients to discontinue therapy with RELISTOR and promptly notify their physician if they develop severe, persistent, and/or worsening abdominal symptoms. Peritoneal Catheters The use of RELISTOR has not been studied in patients with peritoneal catheters. ADVERSE REACTIONS Clinical Trial Experience Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in the clinical trials of a drug may not reflect the rates observed in clinical practice. The safety of RELISTOR was evaluated in two, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with advanced illness receiving palliative care: Study 1 included a single dose, double blind, placebo-controlled period, whereas Study 2 included a 14-day multiple dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled period. The most common adverse reactions (>5%) in patients receiving RELISTOR are shown in the table above. Adverse Reaction RELISTOR N = 165 Placebo N = 123 Abdominal Pain 47 (28.5%) 12 (9.8%) Flatulence 22 (13.3%) 7 (5.7%) Nausea 19 (11.5%) 6 (4.9%) Dizziness 12 (7.3%) 3 (2.4%) Diarrhea 9 (5.5%) 3 (2.4%) Hyperhidrosis 11 (6.7%) 8 (6.5%) * Doses: 0.075, 0.15, and 0.30 mg/kg/dose The rates of discontinuation due to adverse events during the double-blind placebo controlled clinical trials (Study 3 and Study 4) were comparable between RELISTOR (1.2%) and placebo (2.4%). Postmarketing Experience In addition to adverse events reported from clinical trials, the following adverse events have been identified during post-approval use of RELISTOR. Because they are reported voluntarily from a population of unknown size, estimates of frequency cannot be made. These events have been chosen for inclusion due to either their seriousness, frequency of reporting or causal connection to RELISTOR, or a combination of these factors. Gastrointestinal Cramping, perforation, vomiting General Disorders and Administrative Site Disorders Diaphoresis, flushing, malaise, pain DRUG INTERACTIONS Drugs Metabolized by Cytochrome P450 Isozymes In in vitro drug metabolism studies methylnaltrexone bromide did not significantly inhibit the activity of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isozymes CYP1A2, CYP2A6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 or CYP3A4, while it is a weak inhibitor of CYP2D6. In a clinical drug interaction study in healthy adult male subjects, a subcutaneous dose of 0.30 mg/kg of methylnaltrexone bromide did not significantly affect the metabolism of dextromethorphan, a CYP2D6 substrate. Drugs Renally Excreted The potential for drug interactions between methylnaltrexone bromide and drugs that are actively secreted by the kidney has not been investigated in humans. USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS Pregnancy Pregnancy Category B Reproduction studies have been performed in pregnant rats at intravenous doses up to about 14 times the recommended maximum human subcutaneous dose of 0.3 mg/kg based on the body surface area and in pregnant rabbits at intravenous doses up to about 17 times the recommended maximum human subcutaneous dose based on the body surface area and have revealed no evidence of impaired fertility or harm to the fetus due to methylnaltrexone bromide. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women. Because animal reproduction studies are not always predictive of human response, methylnaltrexone bromide should be used during pregnancy only if clearly needed. Labor and Delivery Effects of RELISTOR on mother, fetus, duration of labor, and delivery are unknown. There were no effects on the mother, labor, delivery, or on offspring survival and growth in rats following subcutaneous injection of methylnaltrexone bromide at dosages up to 25 mg/kg/day. Nursing Mothers Results from an animal study using [3H]-labeled methylnaltrexone bromide indicate that methylnaltrexone bromide is excreted via the milk of lactating rats. It is not known whether this drug is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when RELISTOR is administered to a nursing woman. Pediatric Use Safety and efficacy have not been established in pediatric patients. Geriatric Use In the phase 2 and 3 double-blind studies, a total of 77 (24%) patients aged 65-74 years (54 methylnaltrexone bromide, 23 placebo) and a total of 100 (31.2%) patients aged 75 years or older (61 methylnaltrexone bromide, 39 placebo) were enrolled. There was no difference in the efficacy or safety profile of these elderly patients when compared to younger patients. Therefore, no dose adjustment is recommended based on age. Renal Impairment No dose adjustment is required in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. Dose reduction by one-half is recommended in patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance less than 30 mL/min as estimated by Cockcroft-Gault). No studies were performed in patients with end-stage renal impairment requiring dialysis. Hepatic Impairment No dose adjustment is required for patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. The effect of severe hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of methylnaltrexone bromide has not been studied. www.salix.com 8510 Colonnade Center Drive, Raleigh, NC 27615 For additional information, call: 1-866-669-SLXP (7597) To report adverse events, call: 1 800-508-0024 ©2012 Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in USA. REL REL 13/22 13/02
© Copyright 2024