Rhoten, Deborah

Abstract Background Nausea, vomiting, and constipation ( OIC ) are common adverse effects of acute or chronic opioid use. Naloxegol (25 mg) is an approved peripherally active mu‐opiate opioid receptor antagonist. Aim To compare the effects on pan‐gut transit of treatment with codeine, naloxegol, or combination in healthy volunteers. Methods We conducted a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, single‐center, parallel‐group study in 72 healthy opioid‐naïve adults, randomized to: codeine (30 mg q.i.d.), naloxegol (25 mg daily), codeine and naloxegol, or matching placebo. During 3 days of treatment, we measured gastric emptying ( GE ) T 1/2 , colonic filling at 6 hours ( CF 6), colonic geometric center at 24 and 48 hours, and ascending colon emptying ( ACE ) T 1/2 . Key Results Participants were 59.7% women, median BMI 25.0 kg/m 2 , and median age 33.8 years. Codeine significantly retarded GE T 1/2, CF 6, overall colonic transit, and ACE T 1/2 . There was significant difference ( P = .026) in GE T 1/2 between codeine (144.0 min [ IQR 110.5‐238.6]) and naloxegol (95.5 min [89.1‐135.4]). There was a significant overall group difference in CF 6 ( P = .023), with significant difference ( P = .019) between codeine (11.0% [0.0‐45.0]) and naloxegol (51% [18.8‐76.2]). However, no significant differences were found between codeine‐treated participants concomitantly receiving placebo or naloxegol. Conclusions and Inferences Short‐term administration of naloxegol (25 mg) in healthy, opioid‐naïve volunteers does not reverse the retardation of gastric, small bowel, or colonic transit induced by acute administration of codeine. Further studies with naloxegol at higher dose are warranted to assess the ability to reverse the retardation of transit caused by acute administration of codeine in opioid‐naïve subjects.

Aprepitant, an NK1 receptor antagonist, is approved for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced or postoperative emesis by blocking NK1 receptors in the brain stem vomiting center. The effects of NK1 receptors on gastric functions and postprandial symptoms in humans are unclear; a single, crossover study did not show a significant effect of aprepitant on gastrointestinal transit. Our aim was to compare, in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study (12 healthy volunteers per group), the effects of aprepitant vs. placebo on gastric emptying of solids (by scintigraphy) with a 320-kcal meal, gastric volumes (GVs; fasting and accommodation by single photon emission-computed tomography ), satiation [maximum tolerated volume (MTV)], and symptoms after a dyspeptogenic meal of Ensure. Aprepitant (125 mg on day 1, followed by 80 mg on days 2–5) or placebo, one tablet daily, was administered for 5 consecutive days. Statistical analysis was by unpaired rank sum test, adjusted for sex difference and body mass index. To assess treatment effects on symptoms, we incorporated MTV in the model. Aprepitant increased fasting, postprandial, and accommodation GV and tended to increase volume to fullness and MTV by ~200 kcal. However, aprepitant increased aggregate symptoms, nausea, and pain scores after ingestion the MTV of Ensure. There was no significant effect of aprepitant on gastric half-emptying time of solids. We conclude that NK1 receptors are involved in the control of GV and in determining postprandial satiation and symptoms. Further studies of the pharmacodynamics and therapeutic role of NK1 receptor antagonists in patients with gastroparesis and dyspepsia are warranted. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Aprepitant increases fasting, postprandial, and accommodation gastric volumes. Aprepitant increases volume to fullness and maximum tolerated volume during a nutrient drink test. NK1 receptors are involved in the control of gastric volume and in determining postprandial satiation and symptoms.

AbstractBackgroundSynthetic human ghrelin accelerates gastric emptying, reduces gastric accommodation, and results in numerical increases in postprandial symptom scores. The ghrelin receptor agonist, relamorelin, accelerates gastric emptying in patients with diabetic gastroparesis.AimTo measure pharmacological effects of relamorelin on gastric accommodation, distal antral motility, and satiation in healthy volunteers.MethodsIn a placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, randomized study of 16 healthy volunteers, we compared effects of 30 μg subcutaneous (s.c.) relamorelin to placebo on: (i) gastric volumes measured by single photon emission computed tomography, (ii) 1‐h postprandial distal antral motility index (MI) by 15‐lumen perfusion gastroduodenal manometry, and (iii) satiation tested by Ensure nutrient drink test. Primary endpoints were: fasting and postprandial gastric volumes, distal antral phasic pressure activity (number of contractions, mean amplitude, and MI), and maximum tolerated volume. Results were normally distributed and the two treatment groups were compared using t‐test.Key ResultsRelamorelin, 30 μg s.c., significantly increased the number of contractions in the distal antrum during 0–60 min postmeal when compared to placebo (p = 0.022); this was also observed in the first two 15‐min periods (p = 0.005 and 0.015 for number of contractions 0–15 and 16–30). There was borderline increase in MI0‐15 (p = 0.055) and numerically increased MI0‐60 (p = 0.139) and MI16‐30 (p = 0.116). The amplitude of contractions was not significantly increased. Relamorelin did not significantly alter fasting or postprandial gastric volumes, gastric accommodation, or satiation volumes and symptoms.Conclusions & InferencesRelamorelin increases frequency of distal antral motility contractions without significant effects on amplitude of contractions. The lack of inhibition of accommodation and absence of increase in satiation symptoms support relamorelin for the treatment of symptomatic gastroparesis (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02466711).

Patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with diarrhea (IBS-D) carrying human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DQ2/8 genotypes benefit from gluten withdrawal. Our objective was to compare gastrointestinal barrier function, mucosal inflammation, and transit in nonceliac IBS-D patients and assess association with HLA-DQ2/8 status. In 45 IBS-D patients who were naive to prior exclusion of dietary gluten, we measured small bowel (SB) and colonic mucosal permeability by cumulative urinary lactulose and mannitol excretion (0–2 h for SB and 8–24 h for colon), inflammation on duodenal and rectosigmoid mucosal biopsies (obtained in 28 of 45 patients), tight junction (TJ) protein mRNA and protein expression in SB and rectosigmoid mucosa, and gastrointestinal and colonic transit by validated scintigraphy. SB mucosal biopsies were stained with hematoxylin-eosin to assess villi and intraepithelial lymphocytes, and immunohistochemistry was used to assess CD3, CD8, tryptase, and zonula occludens 1 (ZO-1); colonic biopsy intraepithelial lymphocytes were quantitated. Associations of HLA-DQ were assessed using Wilcoxon's rank-sum test. Relative to healthy control data, we observed a significant increase in SB permeability ( P < 0.001), a borderline increase in colonic permeability ( P = 0.10), and a decrease in TJ mRNA expression in rectosigmoid mucosa in IBS-D. In HLA-DQ2/8-positive patients, ZO-1 protein expression in the rectosigmoid mucosa was reduced compared with that in HLA-DQ2/8-negative patients and colonic transit was slower than in HLA-DQ2/8-negative patients. No other associations with HLA genotype were identified. There is abnormal barrier function (increased SB permeability and reduced mRNA expression of TJ proteins) in IBS-D relative to health that may be, in part, related to immunogenotype, given reduced ZO-1 protein expression in rectosigmoid mucosa in HLA-DQ2/8-positive relative to HLA-DQ2/8-negative patients.

SummaryBackgroundTapentadol is a mu‐opioid receptor agonist and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. In clinical trials, tapentadol provided somatic pain relief comparable to mu‐opioids such as oxycodone, with significantly less gastrointestinal adverse effects. The acute effects of tapentadol on gastrointestinal and colonic transit are unclear.AimTo compare acute effects of oral tapentadol and oxycodone on gastric, small bowel and colonic transit of solids in 38 healthy human subjects.MethodsIn a randomised, parallel‐group, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of the effects of identical‐appearing tapentadol immediate release (IR), 75 mg t.d.s., or oxycodone IR, 5 mg t.d.s., for 48 h, we measured gastric (GE), small bowel (SBT measured as colonic filling at 6 h) and colonic transit by validated scintigraphy. Drug was commenced on the evening before the start of the transit test. The primary endpoints were overall colonic transit (geometric centre, GC) at 24 h and GE half‐time (t1/2). ancova of transit data included gender or BMI as covariates. Adverse effects were summarised.ResultsAt the doses tested, oxycodone and tapentadol significantly delayed GE t1/2 and SBT, but not overall colonic transit, compared to placebo. Transit profiles in all regions were not significantly different between oxycodone and tapentadol at the doses tested. Both oxycodone and tapentadol were associated with nausea and central effects attributable to central opiate effects.ConclusionsTapentadol significantly delayed gastric emptying t1/2 and small bowel transit, similar to oxycodone. These data suggest that acute administration of tapentadol may not have significant advantages over standard mu‐opioids, in terms of the potential to avoid upper gastrointestinal motor dysfunction.