Search

Objectives: Naloxegol is a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist (PAMORA) for treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). The main objective was to analyse the long-term efficacy, quality of life (QOL) and safety of naloxegol in patients with cancer in a real-world study., Methods: This one-year prospective study included patients older than 18 years, with active oncological disease who were under treatment with opioids for pain control and Karnofsky≥50 and OIC with inadequate response to treatment with laxative (s). All the patients received treatment with naloxegol according to clinical criteria. The main efficacy objectives were measured by the patient assessment of constipation QOL questionnaire (PAC-QOL), the PAC symptoms (PAC-SYM), the response rate at day 15, and months 1-3-6-12, and global QOL (EuroQoL-5D-5L)., Results: A total of 126 patients (58.7% males) with a mean age of 61.5 years (95% CI 59.4 to 63.7) were included. PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL total score and all their dimensions improved from baseline (p<0.0001). At 12 months, 77.8% of the patients were responders to naloxegol treatment. Global QOL was conserved from baseline. A total of 28 adverse reactions, mainly gastrointestinal were observed in 15.1% of the patients (19/126), being 75% (21) mild, 17.9% (5) moderate and 7.1% (2) severe. Most adverse reactions (67.9%) appeared the first 15 days of treatment., Conclusion: The results of this first long-term and real-world-data study in patients with cancer, showed the sustained efficacy and safety of naloxegol for the treatment of OIC in this group of patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MC, CB and LC-G received payment from Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L. for their participation in the design and coordination of the study. IH, and AS-Y are employees of Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L. BSL was contracted by Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L. for the design, monitoring and statistical analysis of the study, and for preparation of the manuscript for publication. The rest of the authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest with the study results., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) can affect up to 63% of all patients with cancer. The objectives of this study were to assess quality of life as well as efficacy and safety of naloxegol, in patients with cancer with OIC., Methods: An observational study was made of a cohort of patients with cancer and with OIC exhibiting an inadequate response to laxatives and treated with naloxegol. The sample consisted of adult outpatients with a Karnofsky performance status score ≥50. The Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAC-QOL) and the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) were applied for 3 months., Results: A total of 126 patients (58.2% males) with a mean age of 61.3 years (range 34-89) were included. Clinically relevant improvements (>0.5 points) were recorded in the PAC-QOL and PAC-SYM questionnaires (p<0.0001) from 15 days of treatment. The number of days a week with complete spontaneous bowel movements increased significantly (p<0.0001) from 2.4 to 4.6 on day 15, 4.7 after 1 month and 5 after 3 months. Pain control significantly improved (p<0.0001) during follow-up. A total of 13.5% of the patients (17/126) presented some gastrointestinal adverse reaction, mostly of mild (62.5%) or moderate intensity (25%)., Conclusions: Clinically relevant improvements in OIC-related quality of life, number of bowel movements and constipation-related symptoms were recorded as early as after 15 days of treatment with naloxegol in patients with cancer and OIC, with a good safety profile., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MCD, CBZ and LCG received payment from Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L.U. for their participation in the design and coordination of the study. AJJL, IHG and ASY are employees of Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L.U. BSL was contracted by Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica, S.L.U. for the design, monitoring and statistical analysis of the study, and for preparation of the manuscript for publication., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) has demonstrated >90% efficacy against herpes zoster in adults ≥50 years of age and 68% efficacy in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients ≥18 years of age. We report the immunogenicity and safety of RZV administered to patients with solid tumors (STs) before or at the start of a chemotherapy cycle., Method: In this phase 2/3 observer-blind, multicenter study (NCT01798056), patients with STs who were ≥18 years of age were randomized (1:1) to receive 2 doses of RZV or placebo 1-2 months apart and stratified (4:1) according to the timing of the first dose with respect to the start of a chemotherapy cycle (first vaccination 8-30 days before the start or at the start [±1 day] of a chemotherapy cycle). Anti-glycoprotein E (gE) antibody concentrations, gE-specific CD4 + T cell frequencies, and vaccine response rates (VRRs) were assessed 1 month after dose 1 and 1 and 12 months after dose 2. Reactogenicity and safety were assessed in the total vaccinated cohort through 12 months after dose 2., Results: There were 232 participants in the total vaccinated cohort, 185 participants in the according-to-protocol cohort for humoral immunogenicity, and 58 participants in the according-to-protocol cohort for cell-mediated immunogenicity. Postvaccination anti-gE antibody concentrations, gE-specific CD4 + T cell frequencies and VRRs were higher in RZV recipients than in placebo recipients. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were more frequent among RZV recipients than placebo recipients. Incidence of unsolicited AEs, serious AEs, fatalities, and potential immune-mediated diseases were similar between RZV and placebo recipients., Conclusion: RZV was immunogenic in patients with STs receiving immunosuppressive chemotherapies. Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses persisted 1 year after vaccination. No safety concerns were identified., (© 2019 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Introduction: Although breakthrough dyspnea is very frequent in cancer patients, there are no precise recommendations for treating it. The main objective of this study was to analyze what treatments are used in clinical practice for the management of breakthrough dyspnea in cancer patients in Spain and the secondary objectives were to describe the characteristics of cancer patients with breakthrough dyspnea and the attributes of the disorder., Methods: Cancer patients over 18 years of age, with breakthrough dyspnea and a Karnofsky performance score of ≥30, who were treated at departments of oncology in institutes across Spain were included in this cross-sectional observational study. The characteristics of breakthrough dyspnea, history of treatment, anthropometric variables, Mahler dyspnea index, Borg scale, Edmonton Symptoms Assessment Scale, and patient satisfaction with current breakthrough dyspnea treatment were assessed., Results: The mean age of the 149 included patients was 66 years (95% confidence interval: 64.3 to 67.9), and 53 were females (35.6%). The mean breakthrough dyspnea intensity was 5.85 (95% confidence interval 5.48 to 6.22, Borg scale). A total of 55.1% of the first-choice treatments consisted of opioids, followed by oxygen (17.3%). A total of 119 patients (79.9%) received monotherapy for breakthrough dyspnea. Patients presenting with basal dyspnea received oxygen in a greater proportion of cases (21.1% vs 7.4%; p = 0.07). Patients with predictable dyspnea received a greater proportion of opioids (70.9% vs 44.4%; p = 0.01)., Conclusions: Opioids constitute first-line therapy for breakthrough dyspnea in routine clinical practice, though the scientific evidence supporting their use is scarce. Further information derived from controlled clinical trials is needed regarding the comparative efficacy of the different treatments in order to justify their use.