4.7 Review

Review article: An analysis of the pharmacological rationale for selecting drugs to inhibit vomiting or increase gastric emptying during treatment of gastroparesis

期刊

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
卷 57, 期 9, 页码 962-978

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.17466

关键词

aprepitant; domperidone; gastric emptying; gastroparesis; nausea; prucalopride; vomiting

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study summarizes the drugs used to treat gastroparesis and explores the rationale behind blocking different pathways causing vomiting and increasing gastric emptying via different mechanisms. The results suggest that some drug classes lack scientific rationale for inhibiting vomiting. NK1 antagonism shows some rationale but limited efficacy against nausea. The efficacy of selective 5-HT4 agonists varies. Further research is needed to develop novel approaches targeting nausea and objective assessments of nausea.
BackgroundDrugs which can inhibit nausea/vomiting and/or increase gastric emptying are used to treat gastroparesis, mostly 'off-label'. Within each category, they act at different targets and modulate different physiological mechanisms. AimsAddress the questions: In gastroparesis, why should blocking one pathway causing vomiting, be more appropriate than another? Why might increasing gastric emptying via one mechanism be more appropriate than another? MethodsDrugs used clinically were identified via consensus opinions and reviews, excluding the poorly characterised. Their pharmacology was defined, mapped to mechanisms influencing vomiting and gastric emptying, and rationale developed for therapeutic use. ResultsVomiting: Rationale for 5-HT3, D-2, H-1 or muscarinic antagonists, and mirtazapine, amitriptyline, nortriptyline, are poor. Arguments for inhibiting central consequences of vagal afferent transmission by NK1 antagonism are complicated by doubts over effects on nausea. Gastric emptying: Confusion emerges because of side-effects of drugs increasing gastric emptying: Metoclopramide (5-HT4 agonist, D-2 and 5-HT3 antagonist; also blocks some emetic stimuli and causes tardive dyskinesia) and Erythromycin (high-efficacy motilin agonist, requiring low doses to minimise side-effects). Limited trials with selective 5-HT4 agonists indicate variable efficacy. ConclusionsSeveral drug classes inhibiting vomiting have no scientific rationale. NK1 antagonism has rationale but complicated by limited efficacy against nausea. Studies must resolve variable efficacy of selective 5-HT4 agonists and apparent superiority over motilin agonists. Overall, lack of robust activity indicates a need for novel approaches targeting nausea (e.g., modulating gastric pacemaker or vagal activity, use of receptor agonists or new targets such as GDF15) and objective assessments of nausea.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据