Background: Naldemedine, a peripherally acting opioid μ receptor antagonist, is effective for prevention of opioid-induced constipation (OIC); however, evidence on its use in children is limited. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of naldemedine in pediatric patients with OIC. Design, Setting/Subjects: Retrospective analysis of 32 pediatric patients with OIC treated with naldemedine in a single institution in Japan from June 2017 to March 2021. Measurements: Efficacy was evaluated in 13 evaluable patients with bowel movement (BM) response, defined as those with at least three BMs in the first 7 days after naldemedine initiation and an increase of at least one BM from baseline. Safety was evaluated by examining adverse events (AEs) based on the Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (v5.0). Results: BM response was recorded in 11 of the 13 patients (85%), and the number BMs per day significantly increased from 0.43 before naldemedine to 1.00 after naldemedine (p = 0.025). The most common AE was diarrhea, observed in 16 of the 32 patients (50%), and all instances were grade 1 or 2. In three of the 16 patients, naldemedine was discontinued owing to worsening diarrhea. Conclusions: In pediatric patients, naldemedine resulted in a high rate of BM response and increased the BM frequency, indicating its efficacy. In some patients, grade 2 diarrhea required naldemedine discontinuation, suggesting that it should be used with caution in pediatric patients. Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal naldemedine dose in pediatric patients.

The pharmacokinetics (PK) of naloxegol were characterized in pediatric subjects, aged 6 months or older to less than 18 years who either have or are at risk of developing opioid-induced constipation following single dose administration. Subjects grouped as aged 12 years or older to less than 18 years, 6 months or older to less than 12 years, and 6 months or older to less than 6 years, received a single oral dose of naloxegol at doses that were estimated to achieve plasma exposures comparable to adult 12.5- or 25-mg doses. Intensive and sparse plasma naloxegol samples were collected to assess naloxegol concentrations. Data were combined with previously collected adult PK data and used to estimate PK parameters using population PK analyses. Naloxegol PK was described using a 2-compartment model with Weibull-type absorption. Neither age nor body weight was identified as a significant covariate indicating similar PK properties in adult and pediatric subjects. PK estimates in the youngest age group were approximately 80% less than those in adults (12.5-mg equivalent dose). Exposures in the other pediatric groups were similar to those in adult equivalent doses. The PK of naloxegol were characterized as linear over the dose range, with no clinically significant covariates and comparable PK characteristics in adults and pediatric subjects aged 6 months or older.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid-induced constipation is an adverse effect often experienced among patients taking prescription opioid medication. Despite frequent opioid prescribing after orthopedic injury, there is a dearth of research examining opioid-induced constipation presentations in this population. This analysis examines the frequency of opioid-induced constipation manifestations and association with patient-reported outcomes among participants prescribed opioid medication following orthopedic injury.
METHODS: Secondary analysis of 86 clinical trial participants following orthopedic trauma.
METHODS: Participants were assessed 2-weeks postoperatively with the following measures: Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference, PROMIS Physical Function, past 24-hour average pain intensity captured on the numeric pain rating scale, and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) questionnaire. Linear regressions examined the association between PAC-SYM scores and both pain intensity and PROMIS T-scores while accounting for injury severity and opioid medication dosage.
RESULTS: Most participants (69%) reported experiencing opioid-induced constipation symptoms and 7% reported moderate to severe symptoms. Compared to those without symptoms, participants reporting opioid-induced constipation symptoms were found to have a 3-point increase in PROMIS Pain Interference (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.28-5.90; p = .032), a 3-point decline in PROMIS Physical Function (95% CI: -6.57 to -0.02; p = .049), and a 1.7-point increase in average pain scores (95% CI: 0.50-3.01; p = .007) at 2-weeks following surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Opioid-induced constipation symptoms are common after orthopedic trauma and linked to increased pain interference and pain intensity as well as reduced physical function.
CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-led assessments of opioid-induced constipation can support the timely delivery of interventions to alleviate symptoms and potentially improve patient-reported outcomes after injury.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of naldemedine for treating opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with advanced cancer, who are receiving palliative care, and particularly explored its early effects.
METHODS: Palliative care teams and inpatient palliative care units across 14 institutions in Japan were included in this multicenter, prospective, observational study. Patients who were newly prescribed a daily oral dose of 0.2 mg naldemedine were enrolled. The spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) within 24 h after the first dose of naldemedine was considered the primary outcome, whereas, the secondary outcomes included weekly changes in SBM frequency and adverse events.
RESULTS: A total of 204 patients were enrolled and 184 completed the 7-day study. The average age of the participants (103 males, 101 females) was 63 ± 14 years. The primary cancer was detected in the lungs (23.5%), gastrointestinal tract (13.7%), and urological organs (9.3%). A considerable proportion of patients (34.8%) had ECOG performance status of 3-4. Most patients were undergoing active cancer treatment, however, 40.7% of the patients were receiving the best supportive care. Within 24 h of the first naldemedine dose, 146 patients (71.6%, 95% CI: 65.4-77.8%) experienced SBMs. The weekly SBM counts increased in 62.7% of the participants. The major adverse events included diarrhea and abdominal pain, detected in 17.6% and 5.4% of the patients, respectively. However, no serious adverse events were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Conclusively, naldemedine is effective and safe for OIC treatments in real-world palliative care settings.
BACKGROUND: UMIN000031381, registered 20/02/2018.

OBJECTIVE: Constipation is a common adverse event of opioid use that is often difficult to treat. Methylnaltrexone is a therapeutic option for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) approved for oral and subcutaneous use in adults. These administration routes are not always feasible in the pediatric population. The primary objective of this research was to quantify the response rate of methylnaltrexone in pediatric patients when it was administered via the intravenous (IV) route.
METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated patients ages <18 years who received IV methylnaltrexone between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2020, for OIC. Efficacy was evaluated through documentation of bowel evacuation within 4 hours of methylnaltrexone administration. Adverse events observed within 24 hours of administration were attributed to methylnaltrexone.
RESULTS: Methylnaltrexone was administered to 134 unique patients during the study period. Of these, 46 met exclusion criteria, resulting in 88 patients being included in the study. Patients with an underlying hematology/oncology diagnosis consisted of 77% of the study population, and 23% of patients had an -underlying medical/surgical diagnosis. The response rate to IV methylnaltrexone was 25% (CI, 16-34).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this retrospective chart review demonstrate the potential role of IV methylnaltrexone in the pediatric population. Despite the overall lower response rate relative to that reported in adults, IV methylnaltrexone possesses a unique mechanism of action that may serve as an alternative treatment option for patients unable to use the oral and subcutaneous administration routes. There were no significant adverse events seen in the study.

Objectives  Methylnaltrexone is U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved as a subcutaneous injection for adults with opioid-induced constipation (OIC). Case series have described the use of methylnaltrexone for OIC in the pediatric oncology population. There are limited data describing its intravenous use in critically ill pediatric patients. Methods  We conducted a retrospective observational study at St. Louis Children\'s Hospital. Patients less than 18 years old who received at least one dose of intravenous methylnaltrexone while admitted to an intensive care unit between January 2016 and August 2019 were included. The primary outcome was documented laxation within 24 hours of methylnaltrexone administration. Results  Sixteen patients received a total of 34 doses of intravenous methylnaltrexone. Patients received a median of 1.69 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.9-4.86) morphine milligram equivalents per kilogram per 24 hours, over a median of 14 days (IQR, 11-30), before methylnaltrexone administration. The median dose of methylnaltrexone was 0.15 mg/kg (IQR, 0.15-0.16). Ten patients (63%) responded to the first dose of methylnaltrexone, and 14 patients (88%) responded to at least one dose. Overall, 26 doses (76%) led to patient response. Four patients (25%) experienced adverse events (emesis, abdominal pain) after methylnaltrexone administration. No signs or symptoms of opioid withdrawal were documented. Conclusions  Intravenous methylnaltrexone appears to be safe and effective in treating OIC in critically ill pediatric patients. No serious adverse events or signs of opioid withdrawal were observed after single and repeat dosing. Patients responded to methylnaltrexone with varying opioid dosing and durations prior to administration.

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.
CONCLUSIONS: All studies were industry-funded, and given that only three trials were randomized controlled studies, the overall quality of the studies was lacking.
CONCLUSIONS: 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.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is the most prevalent side effect of methadone maintenance therapy (MMT). Naloxone could reduce the OIC.
METHODS: Fifty-six MMT cases (< 75 mg/day methadone, > 3 months) were entered randomly into four groups of a trial. They received placebo or naloxone tablets (0.5, 2, or 4 mg/day) once a day for 2 weeks. They continued their conventional laxative. Their constipation and opiate withdrawal (OWS) were evaluated by the Bristol Stool Form Scale (stool consistency and frequency), Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) questionnaire, Constipation Scoring System (CSS), and the Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) before starting treatment and at the end of the first and second weeks.
RESULTS: The dose of 4 mg/day naloxone was excluded from the study due to severe OWS. The precipitants of groups had similar ages, methadone dose and duration, laxative use, and constipation scores at the start of the trial. However, 2 mg of naloxone could change the stool consistency (PV = 0.0052) and frequency (P = 0.0133), 0.5 mg/day dose only improved the stool consistency (P = 0.0016). The patients\' CSS and PAC-SYM scores were reduced by naloxone after the 1st week of treatment. However, there was no significant difference in the mean score of SOWS at different assessment times and groups. Also, 3 and 4 cases of 0.5 and 2 mg/day groups, respectively, withdrew from the study due to OWS.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral naloxone at doses of 0.5 and 2 mg/day was significantly more effective than placebo on OIC in MMT. However, the dose of 4 mg induced intolerable OWS.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are pain relievers that are often associated with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) that worsens with age. We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis on the efficacy and safety of naldemedine, an opioid receptor antagonist, in treating OIC in patients with cancer (age >75 years).
METHODS: The electronic medical records of cancer patients who received naldemedine at 10 Japanese institutions between 7 June 2017 and August 31, 2019, were retrieved. Patients aged ≥75 years who were treated with naldemedine for the first time and hospitalized for at least 7 days before and after initiating naldemedine therapy were included in this analysis.
RESULTS: Sixty patients were observed for at least 7 days before and after starting naldemedine. The response rate was 68.3%, and the frequency of bowel movements increased significantly after naldemedine administration in the overall population ( P  < 0.0001) and among those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine administration ( P  < 0.0001). Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event in all grades, observed in 45% of patients, of which 92.6% were Grade 1 or 2. Grade 4 or higher adverse events, including death, were not observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Naldemedine exhibits significant efficacy and safety in OIC treatment in older patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related pain often requires opioid treatment with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) as its most frequent gastrointestinal side-effect. Both for prevention and treatment of OIC osmotic (e.g. polyethylene glycol) and stimulant (e.g. bisacodyl) laxatives are widely used. Newer drugs such as the peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) and naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone have become available for the management of OIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to give an overview of the scientific evidence on pharmacological strategies for the prevention and treatment of OIC in cancer patients.
METHODS: A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library was completed from inception up to 22 October 2022. Randomized and non-randomized studies were systematically selected. Bowel function and adverse drug events were assessed.
RESULTS: Twenty trials (prevention: five RCTs and three cohort studies; treatment: ten RCTs and two comparative cohort studies) were included in the review. Regarding the prevention of OIC, three RCTs compared laxatives with other laxatives, finding no clear differences in effectivity of the laxatives used. One cohort study showed a significant benefit of magnesium oxide compared with no laxative. One RCT found a significant benefit for the PAMORA naldemedine compared with magnesium oxide. Preventive use of oxycodone/naloxone did not show a significant difference in two out of three other studies compared to oxycodone or fentanyl. A meta-analysis was not possible. Regarding the treatment of OIC, two RCTs compared laxatives, of which one RCT found that polyethylene glycol was significantly more effective than sennosides. Seven studies compared an opioid antagonist (naloxone, methylnaltrexone or naldemedine) with placebo and three studies compared different dosages of opioid antagonists. These studies with opioid antagonists were used for the meta-analysis. Oxycodone/naloxone showed a significant improvement in Bowel Function Index compared to oxycodone with laxatives (MD -13.68; 95 % CI -18.38 to -8.98; I2 = 58 %). Adverse drug event rates were similar amongst both groups, except for nausea in favour of oxycodone/naloxone (RR 0.51; 95 % CI 0.31-0.83; I2 = 0 %). Naldemedine (NAL) and methylnaltrexone (MNTX) demonstrated significantly higher response rates compared to placebo (NAL: RR 2.07, 95 % CI 1.64-2.61, I2 = 0 %; MNTX: RR 3.83, 95 % CI 2.81-5.22, I2 = 0 %). With regard to adverse events, abdominal pain was more present in treatment with methylnaltrexone and diarrhea was significantly more present in treatment with naldemedine. Different dosages of methylnaltrexone were not significantly different with regard to both efficacy and adverse drug event rates.
CONCLUSIONS: Magnesium oxide and naldemedine are most likely effective for prevention of OIC in cancer patients. Naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone, naldemedine and methylnaltrexone effectively treat OIC in cancer patients with acceptable adverse events. However, their effect has not been compared to standard (osmotic and stimulant) laxatives. More studies comparing standard laxatives with each other and with opioid antagonists are necessary before recommendations for clinical practice can be made.