DOCSLIB.ORG

Evidence Tables

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evidence Tables Drug Class Review on Newer Antiemetics Final Report Evidence Tables January 2006 A literature scan of this topic is done periodically The purpose of this report is to make available information regarding the comparative effectiveness and safety profiles of different drugs within pharmaceutical classes. Reports are not usage guidelines, nor should they be read as an endorsement of, or recommendation for, any particular drug, use or approach. Oregon Health & Science University does not recommend or endorse any guideline or recommendation developed by users of these reports. Kimberly Peterson, MS Marian McDonagh, PharmD Susan Carson, MPH Sarah Lopez, BA Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center Oregon Health & Science University Mark Helfand, MD, MPH, Director Copyright © 2006 by Oregon Health & Science University Portland, Oregon 97201. All rights reserved. Note: A scan of the medical literature relating to the topic is done periodically (see http://www.ohsu.edu/ohsuedu/research/policycenter/DERP/about/methods.cfm for scanning process description). The Drug Effectiveness Review Project governance group elected to proceed with another update of this report. Please see timeline on the DERP website for details on the date of its release. Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials..............................................................3 Evidence Table 2. Quality assessments of the chemotherapy head-to-head trials ....................111 Evidence Table 3. Chemotherapy: placebo-controlled trials.....................................................144 Evidence Table 4. Quality assessments of the chemotherapy placebo-controlled trials ...........179 Evidence Table 5. Chemotherapy: active-controlled trials........................................................191 Evidence Table 6. Quality assessments of the chemotherapy active-controlled trials ..............205 Evidence Table 7. Radiation: controlled clinical trials..............................................................208 Evidence Table 8. Quality assessments for the radiation controlled clinical trials ...................228 Evidence Table 9. Prevention of PONV: head-to-head trials....................................................240 Evidence Table 10. Quality assessments of the head-to-head trials for the prevention of PONV........................................................................268 Evidence Table 11. Prevention of PONV: Active-controlled and placebo-controlled trials......274 Evidence Table 12. Quality assessment of active-controlled and placebo-controlled trials for prevention of PONV ...................................................................................298 Evidence Table 13. Treatment of established PONV: systematic reviews.................................310 Evidence Table 14. Treatment of established PONV: comparative clinical trials .....................316 Evidence Table 15. Quality assessments of the comparative clinical trials for treatment of established PONV.......................................................................................336 Evidence Table 16. Long-term uncontrolled intervention studies of safety and adverse events............................................................................339 Evidence Table 17. Quality assessment of long-term uncontrolled intervention studies of safety and adverse events ......................................................................................343 Newer Antiemetics Page 2 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Age Setting Allow other Gender Hesketh rating Design Subpopulation Intervention medication Run-in/ Wash-out Ethnicity Children Jaing Open RCT children, females granisetron po 0.5 or 1.0mg no other antiemetics 4 wk run-in with 7.8 2004 Crossover ondansetron iv 0.45mg/kg allowed. antiemetics acc. to 64%male Multicenter rand. scheme/NR NR 3 once Forni DB RCT children Ondansetron iv 5.3mg/m2 Antiemetics were given NR/NR 16.9 2000 Parallel Granisetron iv 2mg/m2 with dexamethasone 8 69%male Not specified Tropisetron iv 3.3mg/m2 mg/m2 iv. NR 5 Newer Antiemetics Page 3 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Screened/ Withdrawn/ Setting Eligible/ Lost to fu/ Hesketh rating Enrolled Analyzed Other population characteristics Children Jaing 35/33/33 0/0/33 Acute lymphoblastic leukemia: 100% 2004 Multicenter 3 Forni NR/NR/90 NR/0/90 NR 2000 Not specified 5 Newer Antiemetics Page 4 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Setting Hesketh rating Results Children Jaing Granisetron vs Ondansetron 2004 Complete response: no emetic episodes and no need for rescue medication: Multicenter Within 24h: 60.6% vs 45.5%, NS 3 Incomplete response: 39.4% vs 54.5%, NS Therapeutic success: 84.8% vs 87.9%, NS Failure: ≥ 3 vomiting episodes in 24h study period: 15% vs 12%, NS Forni Results given as Ondansetron vs Granisetron vs Tropisetron 2000 Complete response (no vomiting or retching) Not specified Complete response : 58.3% vs 62.9% vs 57.1%, NS 5 Complete response: broken down by chemo regimen, not by study drug: 69% vs 44%, 0.0001 for ifos pts vs. cisplatin pts Partial response, % of patient days (1-4 episodes of vomiting/day): 34.2% vs 28.2% vs 38.3%, NS Failure (≥5 episodes of vomiting/day) % of patient days: 7.5% vs 8.9% vs 4.6%, NS Newer Antiemetics Page 5 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Setting Hesketh rating Adverse events Comments Children Jaing "The most frequently reported AEs were mild headache and constipation. No concomitant antiemetic therapy apart from the study drugs was given to 2004 The AEs were the same in both groups." the patients. Multicenter 3 Forni All patient days Population stratified by age owing to rarity of osteosarcoma; both pediatric 2000 Headache: 3.9% of 717 pt days, NR and adult pts entered study. Nausea data not collected because pediatric Not specified pts deemed not able to give reliable nausea data. Withdrawal data: No 5 Headache was the only AE the authors reported; they stated that it was of cases of dose reduction of antiblastics; in 2 pts the ifosfamide (ifo) cycle mild intensity and its frequency was the same in all 3 treatment groups. was stopped (on days 4 & 5 of infusion) because of neurotoxicity. 717 pt- days of treatment evaluated for 90 pts; results were given in terms of pt days. 3 pt days not evaluable: 2 Gran pts were not given ifo for 3 days total due to neurological problems. Children not analyzed as a subpopulation. In cisplatin-Adriamycin cycles the complete protection (CP) rate decreased from 61% on day 1 to 27% on day 2. On the third day when Adriamycin was given, the total protection=44% (P<0.0001). During ifo cycles CP decreased from 95.5% on day1 to 43% on the last (P<0.0001). 10% of pts experienced CP on all treatment days during both chemo types. CP was achieved in 19% only for one type of chemo cycle; the remaining 71% experienced emesis in both cycles for at least 1 day. Newer Antiemetics Page 6 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Age Setting Allow other Gender Hesketh rating Design Subpopulation Intervention medication Run-in/ Wash-out Ethnicity White DB RCT children, kinetosis Ondansetron iv 5mg/m2 Dexamethasone 2-4 mg No/NR 8 2000 Parallel Ondansetron po 8mg po was given along with 58%male Multicenter study antiemetics NR 4, 5 Newer Antiemetics Page 7 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Screened/ Withdrawn/ Setting Eligible/ Lost to fu/ Hesketh rating Enrolled Analyzed Other population characteristics White NR/438/428 0/0/428 Mean weight (+/- SD) = 28.6 (+/- 12.2) kg 2000 Mean body surface area: (+/- SD) = 1.01 (+/- 0.30)m2 Multicenter Previous motion sickness: yes: 3% 4, 5 Newer Antiemetics Page 8 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Setting Hesketh rating Results White Ond iv vs Ond po 2000 Complete control of emesis (0 episodes) Multicenter Treatment phase A: 73% vs 71%, NS 4, 5 Overall (A+B): 62% vs 62%, NS Treatment Day 1: 81% vs 78%, NS Major control of emesis (1-2 episodes): Treatment A: 16% vs 17%, NS Overall (A+B): 23% vs 20%, NS Treatment Day 1: 10% vs 13%, NS Mild Nausea Treatment Day 1: 21% vs 21%, NS Phase A (a little bit nauseous): 26% vs 26%, NS Overall (A+B): 36% vs 33%, NS No nausea experienced: Treatment Day 1: 73% vs 70%, NS Overall (Phases A + B): 52% vs 56%, NS Phase A: 64% vs 64%, NS % with reduced appetite during treatment: increased by 7% from baseline vs increased by 12% from baseline, NS Newer Antiemetics Page 9 of 343 Final Evidence Tables Drug Effectiveness Review Project Evidence Table 1. Chemotherapy: head-to-head trials Author Year Setting Hesketh rating Adverse events Comments White Ond iv vs Ond po Ond po administered as an oral syrup, not a tablet. Study medication 2000 All Adverse Events: 20% vs 19%, NS administered during 2 phases: phases A and B. Treatment phase A Multicenter Abdominal/ gastronintestinal discomfort and pain: 4% vs 3%, NS involved each of the days (max. 8 days)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MASCC/ESMO ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINE 2016 with Updates in 2019
    1 ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINES: MASCC/ESMO MASCC/ESMO ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINE 2016 With Updates in 2019 Organizing and Overall Meeting Chairs: Matti Aapro, MD Richard J. Gralla, MD Jørn Herrstedt, MD, DMSci Alex Molassiotis, RN, PhD Fausto Roila, MD © Multinational Association of Supportive Care in CancerTM All rights reserved worldwide. 2 ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINES: MASCC/ESMO These slides are provided to all by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and can be used freely, provided no changes are made and the MASCC and ESMO logos, as well as date of the information are retained. For questions please contact: Matti Aapro at [email protected] Chair, MASCC Antiemetic Study Group or Alex Molassiotis at [email protected] Past Chair, MASCC Antiemetic Study Group 3 ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINES: MASCC/ESMO Consensus A few comments on this guideline set: • This set of guideline slides represents the latest edition of the guideline process. • This set of slides has been endorsed by the MASCC Antiemetic Guideline Committee and ESMO Guideline Committee. • The guidelines are based on the votes of the panel at the Copenhagen Consensus Conference on Antiemetic Therapy, June 2015. • Latest version: March 2016, with updates in 2019. 4 ANTIEMETIC GUIDELINES: MASCC/ESMO Changes: The Steering Committee has clarified some points: 2016: • A footnote clarified that aprepitant 165 mg is approved by regulatory authorities in some parts of the world ( although no randomised clinical trial has investigated this dose ). Thus use of aprepitant 80 mg in the delayed phase is only for those cases where aprepitant 125 mg is used on day 1. • A probable modification in pediatric guidelines based on the recent Cochrane meta-analysis is indicated.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Practice Guideline for Emergency Department Ketamine Dissociative Sedation: 2011 Update
    PAIN MANAGEMENT/CONCEPTS Clinical Practice Guideline for Emergency Department Ketamine Dissociative Sedation: 2011 Update Steven M. Green, MD, Mark G. Roback, MD, Robert M. Kennedy, MD, Baruch Krauss, MD, EdM From the Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center and Children’s Hospital, Loma Linda, CA (Green); the Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN (Roback); the Division of Emergency Medicine, St. Louis Children’s Hospital, Washington University, St. Louis, MO (Kennedy); and the Division of Emergency Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston and Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (Krauss). We update an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the administration of the dissociative agent ketamine for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia. Substantial new research warrants revision of the widely disseminated 2004 guideline, particularly with respect to contraindications, age recommendations, potential neurotoxicity, and the role of coadministered anticholinergics and benzodiazepines. We critically discuss indications, contraindications, personnel requirements, monitoring, dosing, coadministered medications, recovery issues, and future research questions for ketamine dissociative sedation. [Ann Emerg Med. 2011;xx:xxx.] 0196-0644/$-see front matter Copyright © 2011 by the American College of Emergency Physicians. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.11.030 INTRODUCTION thalamocortical and limbic systems, effectively dissociating the The dissociative
    [Show full text]
  • Antiemetics/Antivertigo Agents
    Antiemetic Agents Therapeutic Class Review (TCR) May 1, 2019 No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, digital scanning, or via any information storage or retrieval system without the express written consent of Magellan Rx Management. All requests for permission should be mailed to: Magellan Rx Management Attention: Legal Department 6950 Columbia Gateway Drive Columbia, Maryland 21046 The materials contained herein represent the opinions of the collective authors and editors and should not be construed to be the official representation of any professional organization or group, any state Pharmacy and Therapeutics committee, any state Medicaid Agency, or any other clinical committee. This material is not intended to be relied upon as medical advice for specific medical cases and nothing contained herein should be relied upon by any patient, medical professional or layperson seeking information about a specific course of treatment for a specific medical condition. All readers of this material are responsible for independently obtaining medical advice and guidance from their own physician and/or other medical professional in regard to the best course of treatment for their specific medical condition. This publication, inclusive of all forms contained herein, is intended to be educational in nature and is intended to be used for informational purposes only. Send comments and suggestions to [email protected]. May 2019 Proprietary Information. Restricted Access – Do not disseminate or copy without approval. © 2004-2019 Magellan Rx Management. All Rights Reserved. 3 FDA-APPROVED INDICATIONS Drug Manufacturer Indication(s) NK1 receptor antagonists aprepitant capsules generic, Merck In combination with other antiemetic agents for: (Emend®)1 .
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Use-Function Classification (2007)
    INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY IPCS INTOX Data Management System (INTOX DMS) Revised Use-Function Classification (2007) The Use-Function Classification is used in two places in the INTOX Data Management System: the Communication Record and the Agent/Product Record. The two records are linked: if there is an agent record for a Centre Agent that is the subject of a call, the appropriate Intended Use-Function can be selected automatically in the Communication Record. The Use-Function Classification is used when generating reports, both standard and customized, and for searching the case and agent databases. In particular, INTOX standard reports use the top level headings of the Intended Use-Functions that were selected for Centre Agents in the Communication Record (e.g. if an agent was classified as an Analgesic for Human Use in the Communication Record, it would be logged as a Pharmaceutical for Human Use in the report). The Use-Function classification is very important for ensuring harmonized data collection. In version 4.4 of the software, 5 new additions were made to the top levels of the classification provided with the system for the classification of organisms (items XIV to XVIII). This is a 'convenience' classification to facilitate searching of the Communications database. A taxonomic classification for organisms is provided within the INTOX DMS Agent Explorer. In May/June 2006 INTOX users were surveyed to find out whether they had made any changes to the Use-Function Classification. These changes were then discussed at the 4th and 5th Meetings of INTOX Users. Version 4.5 of the INTOX DMS includes the revised pesticides classification (shown in full below).
    [Show full text]
  • Drugs to Avoid in Patients with Dementia
    Detail-Document #240510 -This Detail-Document accompanies the related article published in- PHARMACIST’S LETTER / PRESCRIBER’S LETTER May 2008 ~ Volume 24 ~ Number 240510 Drugs To Avoid in Patients with Dementia Elderly people with dementia often tolerate drugs less favorably than healthy older adults. Reasons include increased sensitivity to certain side effects, difficulty with adhering to drug regimens, and decreased ability to recognize and report adverse events. Elderly adults with dementia are also more prone than healthy older persons to develop drug-induced cognitive impairment.1 Medications with strong anticholinergic (AC) side effects, such as sedating antihistamines, are well- known for causing acute cognitive impairment in people with dementia.1-3 Anticholinergic-like effects, such as urinary retention and dry mouth, have also been identified in drugs not typically associated with major AC side effects (e.g., narcotics, benzodiazepines).3 These drugs are also important causes of acute confusional states. Factors that may determine whether a patient will develop cognitive impairment when exposed to ACs include: 1) total AC load (determined by number of AC drugs and dose of agents utilized), 2) baseline cognitive function, and 3) individual patient pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic features (e.g., renal/hepatic function).1 Evidence suggests that impairment of cholinergic transmission plays a key role in the development of Alzheimer’s dementia. Thus, the development of the cholinesterase inhibitors (CIs). When used appropriately, the CIs (donepezil [Aricept], rivastigmine [Exelon], and galantamine [Razadyne, Reminyl in Canada]) may slow the decline of cognitive and functional impairment in people with dementia. In order to achieve maximum therapeutic effect, they ideally should not be used in combination with ACs, agents known to have an opposing mechanism of action.1,2 Roe et al studied AC use in 836 elderly patients.1 Use of ACs was found to be greater in patients with probable dementia than healthy older adults (33% vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Yorkshire Palliative Medicine Clinical Guidelines Group Guidelines on the Use of Antiemetics Author(S): Dr Annette Edwards (Chai
    Yorkshire Palliative Medicine Clinical Guidelines Group Guidelines on the use of Antiemetics Author(s): Dr Annette Edwards (Chair) and Deborah Royle on behalf of the Yorkshire Palliative Medicine Clinical Guidelines Group Overall objective : To provide guidance on the evidence for the use of antiemetics in specialist palliative care. Search Strategy: Search strategy: Medline, Embase and Cinahl databases were searched using the words nausea, vomit$, emesis, antiemetic and drug name. Review Date: March 2008 Competing interests: None declared Disclaimer: These guidelines are the property of the Yorkshire Palliative Medicine Clinical Guidelines Group. They are intended to be used by qualified, specialist palliative care professionals as an information resource. They should be used in the clinical context of each individual patient’s needs. The clinical guidelines group takes no responsibility for any consequences of any actions taken as a result of using these guidelines. Contact Details: Dr Annette Edwards, Macmillan Consultant in Palliative Medicine, Department of Palliative Medicine, Pinderfields General Hospital, Aberford Road, Wakefield, WF1 4DG Tel: 01924 212290 E-mail: [email protected] 1 Introduction: Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. A careful history, examination and appropriate investigations may help to infer the pathophysiological mechanism involved. Where possible and clinically appropriate aetiological factors should be corrected. Antiemetics are chosen based on the likely mechanism and the neurotransmitters involved in the emetic pathway. However, a recent systematic review has highlighted that evidence for the management of nausea and vomiting in advanced cancer is sparse. (Glare 2004) The following drug and non-drug treatments were reviewed to assess the strength of evidence for their use as antiemetics with particular emphasis on their use in the palliative care population.
    [Show full text]
  • Parkinson's Disease Fact Sheet
    Parkinson’s Disease Fact Sheet About Parkinson’s Disease Parkinson’s disease is a progressive, incurable neurological disorder associated with a loss of dopamine-generating cells in the brain. It is primarily associated with progressive loss of motor control, but it results in a complex array of symptoms, including many non-motor symptoms. Parkinson’s impacts an estimated one million people in the United States. Critical Clinical Care Considerations • To avoid serious side effects, Parkinson’s patients need their medications on time, every time — do not skip or postpone doses. • Write down the exact times of day medications are to be administered so that doses are given on the same schedule the patient follows at home. • Do not substitute Parkinson’s medications or stop levodopa therapy abruptly. • Resume medications immediately following procedures, unless vomiting or severely incapacitated. • If an antipsychotic is necessary, use pimavanserin (Nuplazid), quetiapine (Seroquel) or clozapine (Clozaril). • Be alert for symptoms of dysphagia (trouble swallowing) and risk of pneumonia. • Ambulate as soon as medically safe. Patients may require assistance. Common Symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease Motor Non-Motor • Shaking or tremor at rest • Depression • Bradykinesia or freezing (being stuck • Anxiety in place when attempting to walk) • Constipation • Low voice volume or muffled speech • Cognitive decline and dementia • Lack of facial expression • Impulse control disorders • Stiffness or rigidity of the arms, legs • Orthostatic hypotension or
    [Show full text]
  • Intracellular Vomit Signals and Cascades Downstream of Emetic Receptors: Evidence from the Least Shrew (Cryptotis Parva) Model of Vomiting
    Mini Review Remedy Open Access Published: 31 Oct, 2017 Intracellular Vomit Signals and Cascades Downstream of Emetic Receptors: Evidence from the Least Shrew (Cryptotis parva) Model of Vomiting Zhong W and Darmani NA* Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Western University of Health Sciences, CA 91766, USA Abstract Nausea and vomiting are often considered as stressful symptoms of many diseases and drugs. In fact they are the most feared and debilitating side-effects of many cancer chemotherapeutics and the main cause of patient noncompliance. Despite years of substantial research, the intracellular emetic signals are at best poorly understood or remain unknown. Among different receptor-mediated emetic signaling cascades, one potential converging signal appears to be changes in the cytosolic concentration of Ca2+. In this editorial, we focus on Ca2+-related intracellular signals underlying emesis mediated by various emetogens. This strategy will help us understand common signaling mechanisms downstream of diverse emetogens and should therefore promote development of new antiemetics for the treatment nausea and vomiting caused by diverse diseases, drugs, as well as viruses and bacterial infections. Keywords: Emetogens; Nausea; Intracellular emetic signals Introduction Nausea and vomiting (emesis) can be both a reason and/or symptoms of diseases, drugs OPEN ACCESS (e.g. chemotherapeutics [1-3], opiates [4]), conditions (pregnancy [5], motion sickness [6], food poisoning [7]), as well as bacterial [8] and viral infections [9]. Treatment of these symptoms require *Correspondence: millions of patient visits per year to the doctors’ office or hospitals in the USA [10,11]. These Nissar A. Darmani, Department of symptoms are an important gastrointestinal problem which worsens the both quality of patient Basic Medical Sciences, College of life and treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vomiting Center and the Chemoreceptor Trigger Zone
    Pharmacologic Control of Vomiting Todd R. Tams, DVM, Dipl. ACVIM VCA West Los Angeles Animal Hospital Pharmacologic Control of Acute Vomiting Initial nonspecific management of vomiting includes NPO (in minor cases a 6-12 hour period of nothing per os may be all that is required), fluid support, and antiemetics. Initial feeding includes small portions of a low fat, single source protein diet starting 6-12 hours after vomiting has ceased. Drugs used to control vomiting will be discussed here. The most effective antiemetics are those that act at both the vomiting center and the chemoreceptor trigger zone. Vomiting is a protective reflex and when it occurs only occasionally treatment is not generally required. However, patients that continue to vomit should be given antiemetics to help reduce fluid loss, pain and discomfort. For many years I strongly favored chlorpromazine (Thorazine), a phenothiazine drug, as the first choice for pharmacologic control of vomiting in most cases. The HT-3 receptor antagonists ondansetron (Zofran) and dolasetron (Anzemet) have also been highly effective antiemetic drugs for a variety of causes of vomiting. Metoclopramide (Reglan) is a reasonably good central antiemetic drug for dogs but not for cats. Maropitant (Cerenia) is a superior broad spectrum antiemetic drug and is now recognized as an excellent first choice for control of vomiting in dogs. Studies and clinical experience have now also shown maropitant to be an effective and safe antiemetic drug for cats. While it is labeled only for dogs, clinical experience has shown it is safe to use the drug in cats as well. Maropitant is also the first choice for prevention of motion sickness vomiting in both dogs and cats.
    [Show full text]
  • Together with CCHP's Medication List Prior Authorization Is Required If Indicated by X(PA)
    Together with CCHP's Medication List Prior authorization is required if indicated by X(PA). Pharmacy Benefit: Submit authorizations through Together with CCHP's Pharmacy Services. Medical Benefit: Submit authorizations through CareWeb Qi Authorization tool. Jcode Brand Name Description Pharmacy Medical Notes J3365 Abbokinase INJECTION, UROKINASE, 250,000 IU X J0287 Abelcet INJECTION, AMPHOTERICIN B LIPID X COMPLEX, 10 MG J0401 Abilify Maintena INJECTION, ARIPIPRAZOLE, EXTENDED X X May bIll eIther RELEASE, 1 MG (PA < 12 YEARS OF benefIt, PA AGE) reQuIred when bIllIng through pharmacy INJECTION, PACLITAXEL PROTEIN- J9264 Abraxane BOUND PARTICLES, 1 MG X J7613 Accuneb ALBUTEROL, INHALATION SOLUTION, X FDA- APPROVED FINAL PRODUCT, NONCOMPOUNDED, ADMINISTERED THROUGH DME, UNIT DOSE, 1 MG J0132 Acetadote INJECTION, ACETYLCYSTEINE, 100 MG X J7608 Acetylcysteine ACETYLCYSTEINE, INHALATION X SOLUTION, FDA- APPROVED FINAL PRODUCT, NONCOMPOUNDED, ADMINISTERED THROUGH DME, UNIT DOSE FORM, PER G J3262 Actemra INJECTION, TOCILIZUMAB, 1 MG X (PA) J0800 Acthar Gel INJECTION, CORTICOTROPIN, UP TO 40 X (PA) UNITS J0795 Acthrel INJECTION, CORTICORELIN OVINE X TRIFLUTATE, 1 MCG J9216 Actimmune INTERFERON GAMMAM 1-B X (PA) J2997 Activase INJECTION, ALTEPLASE RECOMBINANT, X 1 MG J2504 Adagen PEGADEMASE BOVINE 25 IU X (PA) J2062 Adasuve LoxapIne, InhalatIon powder, 10 mg X INJECTION, BRENTUXIMAB VEDOTIN, 1 J9042 Adcetris X MG 1 Together with CCHP's Medication List Prior authorization is required if indicated by X(PA). Pharmacy Benefit: Submit authorizations
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmacology/Therapeutics II Block I Lectures – 2013‐14
    Pharmacology/Therapeutics II Block I Lectures – 2013‐14 54. H2 Blocker, PPls – Patel 55. Principles of Clinical Toxicology – Kennedy 56. Anti‐Parasitic Agents – Johnson (To be posted later) 57. Palliation of Constipation & Nausea/vomiting – Kristopaitis (Lecture in Room 190) Tarun B. Patel, Ph.D Date: January 9, 2013: 10:30 a.m. Reading Assignment: Katzung, Basic and Clinical Pharmacology, 11th Edition, pp. 1067-1077. KEY CONCEPTS AND LEARNING OBJECTIVES Histamine via its different receptors produces a number of physiological and pathological actions. Therefore, anti-histaminergic drugs may be used to treat different conditions. 1. To know the physiological functions of histamine. 2. To understand which histamine receptors mediate the different effects of histamine in stomach ulcers. 3. To know what stimuli cause the release of histamine and acid in stomach. 4. To know the types of histamine H2 receptor antagonists that are available clinically. 5. To know the clinical uses of H2 receptor antagonists. 6. To know the drug interactions associated with the use of H2 receptor antagonists. 7. To understand the mechanism of action of PPIs 8. To know the adverse effects and drugs interactions with PPIs 9. To know the role of H. pylori in gastric ulceration 10. To know the drugs used to treat H. pylori infection Drug List: See Summary Table Provided at end of handout. Page 1 Tarun B. Patel, Ph.D Histamine H2 receptor antagonists and PPIs in the treatment of GI Ulcers: The following section covers medicines used to treat ulcer. These medicines include H2 receptor antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, mucosal protective agents and antibiotics (for treatment of H.
    [Show full text]
  • Nausea and Vomiting and to Manage Breakthrough Symptoms
    6/16/2015 DISCLOSURES ● Leah Edenfield declares no conflicts of interest, real or apparent, CHEMOTHERAPY TOXICITY AND and no financial interests in any company, product, or service SUPPORTIVE CARE: mentioned in this program, including grants, employment, gifts, MANAGEMENT OF stock holdings, and honoraria. GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOMS Leah Edenfield, PharmD, BCPS PGY2 Oncology Pharmacy Resident June 12, 2015 OBJECTIVES Identify gastrointestinal effects frequently associated with chemotherapy Design a strategy to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and to manage breakthrough symptoms Recommend over-the-counter medications for diarrhea and NAUSEA AND VOMITING constipation as well as treatments for refractory symptoms Evaluate appetite stimulants for oncology patients Select appropriate therapy for management of mucositis PATHOPHYSIOLOGY CONTRIBUTING CAUSES Impulses to the vomiting center come from the chemoreceptor trigger zone, pharynx and GI tract, and cerebral cortex Bowel obstruction Impulses are then sent to the salivation center, abdominal muscles, Vestibular dysfunction respiratory center, and cranial nerves Hypercalcemia, hyperglycemia, or hyponatremia Uremia Opiates or other concomitant mediations Gastroparesis Anxiety Serotonin and dopamine receptors are involved in the emetic response and are activated by chemotherapy Other relevant receptors include acetylcholine, corticosteroid, histamine, cannabinoid, opiate, and neurokinin-1 receptors in the vomiting and vestibular centers Antiemesis. NCCN Guidelines. Version 1.2015. Antiemesis. NCCN Guidelines. Version 1.2015. Image available at www.aloxi.net 1 6/16/2015 EMETIC RISK OF CHEMOTHERAPY ASCO GUIDELINES: EMETIC RISK Emetic risk categories .High (>90%) .Moderate (30-90%) .Low (10-30%) .Minimal (<10%) *Anthracycline + cyclophosphamide = high risk American Society of Clinical Oncology 2011. www.asco.org/guidelines/antiemetics. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2011.
    [Show full text]