Cardiovascular safety and benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) constitute a class of drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and currently, six different GLP-1RAs are approved. Besides improving glycemic control, the GLP-1RAs have other beneficial effects such as weight loss and a low risk of hypoglycemia. Treatment with the GLP-1RA lixisenatide has been shown to be safe in patients with type 2 diabetes and recent acute coronary syndrome. Furthermore, liraglutide and semaglutide have been shown to reduce cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) risk in type 2 diabetes patients with established and/or high risk of CVD. The CV safety of the remaining GLP-1RAs in type 2 diabetes patients with established and/or high risk of CVD remains uncertain, but ongoing CV outcome trials (CVOTs) will elucidate this within a few years.

Areas covered: The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the existing GLP-1RAs with a particular focus on their clinical effects on CV risk factors and their CV safety and benefits.

Expert opinion: Data on the CV risks and benefits associated with GLP-1RA treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes and high risk of CVD are emerging – and look promising (especially for liraglutide and semaglutide). Data from ongoing CVOTs will be crucial for the positioning of the individual GLP-1RAs in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes and high risk of CVD. However, the long-term CV safety and the potential of GLP-1RAs to prevent CVD in type 2 diabetes patients with less risk of CVD (e.g. newly diagnosed patients) remain uncertain.     

Safety and tolerability of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: unresolved and emerging issues

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are a mainstay of treatment options for type 2 diabetes. They contribute to lowering blood glucose levels, generally have a favorable tolerability profile, and can be used alone or in combination with other antidiabetic agents. Based on the duration of their effects, GLP-1 RAs can be divided into two classes: short-acting and long-acting. Differences exist between these sub-classes, and between each drug, in terms of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Therefore, prescribers cannot necessarily assume GLP-1 RA ‘class effects’, especially in terms of tolerability.

Areas covered: This article reviews the published data on the safety and tolerability of currently available GLP-1 RAs and, recognizing the importance of safety profiles when selecting the appropriate treatment for each patient, examines the clinical implications of the differences between the drugs in this class. Cardiovascular safety, gastrointestinal tolerability, and tolerability in elderly patients are discussed as specific areas of interest to prescribers selecting between GLP-1 RAs for their patients.

Expert opinion: Although further research is needed, the current evidence offers the potential to tailor treatment more accurately to each patient. Ultimately, this may improve adherence and persistence, thereby improving glycemic control and, in turn, reducing the risk of macro- and micro-vascular complications.     

Exenatide: pharmacokinetics,clinical use,and future directions

Introduction: The first-in-class glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) exenatide, which was initially approved in 2005, is available in twice-daily (BID) and once-weekly (QW) formulations. Clinical trial data suggest both formulations are effective and safe for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), both as monotherapy and as part of combination therapy. Since exenatide was approved, several other GLP-1RAs have become available for clinical use.

Areas covered: Many ongoing clinical trials involving exenatide BID and exenatide QW are investigating new indications (exenatide BID) and new end points and combination therapies (exenatide QW). This review provides an overview of the delivery and pharmacokinetics of both formulations of exenatide, reviews existing data in T2D, and summarizes ongoing investigations.

Expert opinion: Exenatide BID and QW have substantial clinical benefits. Comparisons with other GLP-1RAs demonstrate some differences in efficacy and safety profiles that make assessment of benefit:risk ratios complex. Head-to-head comparisons of QW GLP-1RA formulations may assist in the ranking of GLP-1RAs according to efficacy and safety. Results on the impact of exenatide QW on cardiovascular outcomes are eagerly awaited. The potential clinical utility of exenatide BID in other indications will clarify whether exenatide holds clinical promise in diagnoses other than T2D.     

Adding prandial GLP-1 receptor agonists to basal insulin: a promising option for type 2 diabetes therapy

Background: Diabetes mellitus is a serious and increasingly prevalent condition in Canada and around the world. Treatment strategies have become increasingly complex, with a widening array of pharmacological agents available for glycemic management in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). New therapies that act in concert with available basal insulins may represent alternatives to basal insulin intensification with prandial or pre-mixed insulin. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have recently shown promise as useful additions to basal insulin, with significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin and potentially beneficial effects on body weight. This review will focus on pivotal clinical trials to assess the potential benefits of adding prandial GLP-1 RAs to basal insulin in patients with T2DM.

Methods: Clinical studies combining prandial GLP-1 RAs and basal insulin (published between 2011 and July 2017) were identified and reviewed in PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (Issue 6, June 2017), and clinicaltrials.gov.

Results: Most of the studies presented in this review show that the addition of a prandial GLP-1 RA to basal insulin results in equal or slightly superior efficacy compared to the addition of prandial insulin, together with weight loss and less hypoglycemia.

Conclusions: The results of the studies suggest that a prandial GLP-1 RA as an add-on to basal insulin may be a safe and effective treatment intensification option (vs basal-plus or basal-bolus insulin).     

A comparative safety review between GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors for diabetes treatment

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are of particular interest in type 2 diabetes treatment strategies, due to their efficacy in reducing HbA1c with a low risk of hypoglycaemia, to their positive effects on body weight and blood pressure and in light of their effects on cardiovascular risk and on nephroprotection emerged from the most recent cardiovascular outcome trials.

Since it is therefore very likely that GLP-1RA and SGLT2i use will become more and more common, it is more and more important to gather and discuss information about their safety profile.

Area Covered: adverse events and the safety concerns most often emerged in trials with GLP-1RA namely, exenatide long acting release (LAR), dulaglutide, liraglutide, semaglutide, lixisenatide or SGLT2i, namely empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin and SGLT2i with an attempt at comparing the safety profiles of molecules of these two classes.

Expert opinion: GLP-1RA and SGLT2i, although each associated with different specific side effects, share a ‘similar’ safety profile and are both drugs relatively easy to handle. The potentially complementary mechanisms of action, the cardio and nephroprotective effects demonstrated by molecules of both classes, make these drugs potentially useful even in add on to each other.     

The predictive utility of the plant phylogeny in identifying sources of cardiovascular drugs

Context: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death globally, responsible for over 17 million (31%) deaths in the world. Novel pharmacological interventions may be needed given the high prevalence of CVD.

Objective: In this study, we aimed to find potential new sources of cardiovascular (CV) drugs from phylogenetic and pharmacological analyses of plant species that have experimental and traditional CV applications in the literature.

Materials and methods: We reconstructed the molecular phylogeny of these plant species and mapped their pharmacological mechanisms of action on the phylogeny.

Results: Out of 139 plant species in 71 plant families, seven plant families with 45 species emerged as phylogenetically important exhibiting common CV mechanisms of action within the family, as would be expected given their common ancestry: Apiaceae, Brassicaceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, Malvaceae, Rosaceae and Zingiberaceae. Apiaceae and Brassicaceae promoted diuresis and hypotension; Fabaceae and Lamiaceae had anticoagulant/thrombolytic effects; Apiaceae and Zingiberaceae were calcium channel blockers. Moreover, Apiaceae, Lamiaceae, Malvaceae, Rosaceae and Zingiberaceae species were found to possess anti-atherosclerotic properties.

Discussion and conclusions: The phylogeny identified certain plant families with disproportionately more species, highlighting their importance as sources of natural products for CV drug discovery. Though there were some species that did not show the same mechanism within the family, the phylogeny predicts that these species may contain undiscovered phytochemistry, and potentially, the same bioactivity. Evolutionary pharmacology, as applied here, may guide and expedite our efforts in discovering sources of new CV drugs.     

Sgemaglutide in type 2 diabetes – is it the best glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1R agonist)?

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is produced by the gut, and in a glucose-dependent manner stimulates insulin secretion while inhibiting glucagon secretion, reduces appetite and energy intake, and delays gastric emptying. The GLP-1R agonist semaglutide has recently been registered to treat type 2 diabetes.

Area covered: This review is of semaglutide in type 2 diabetes, and considers which properties of this GLP-1R agonist, may be responsible for its clinical outcome benefits .

Expert opinion: The pharmacokinetics of semaglutide make it ideal for once-weekly dosing. SUSTAIN 6 (Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular and Other Long-term Outcomes With Semaglutide in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes) showed that semaglutide 0.5 or 1 mg subcutaneously once-weekly reduced cardiovascular outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease or risk, mean age 65 years, baseline HbA1c 8.7% and mean body weight of 92 kg. Although, semaglutide may be a useful drug in this population, it increased retinopathy to a small extent and this needs further investigation. Also, it is not known whether semaglutide will improve cardiovascular outcomes in other populations including those with lower ages, HbA1c values, and body weights similar to those included in the unsuccessful clinical outcome trials with the GLP-1R agonists, lixisenatide and exenatide.     

The safety of albiglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Introduction: Albiglutide is a marketed long acting GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) administered by weekly injection. It has significantly less gastrointestinal side effects than other GLP-1 RAs in current use but does not improve HbA1c or promote weight loss to the same extent as competitor agents such as liraglutide.

Area Covered: The safety of albiglutide is discussed. The review encompassed a search of PubMed and a thorough analysis of the European Union and US Food and Drug Administration approval documents.

Expert Opinion: Unlike competitor agents, the gastrointestinal side effects of albiglutide are not much greater than placebo. It has been studied and appears safe at all stages of renal failure. There exists concern about an imbalance of pancreatitis cases in the approval program as well as injection site reactions which led to discontinuance of therapy in up to 2% of participants. A large long term study now underway will determine if albiglutide, with its relatively favorable GI tolerance, has a place in the treatment of patients with increased risk of cardiovascular events.     

Antidiabetic agents and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart diseases

Introduction: This article reviews evidence of the benefits and risk of antidiabetic agents in cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, with a focus on medications approved by the FDA since 2008.

Study selection: Peer-reviewed articles were identified from MEDLINE and Current Content databases (both 1966 to 1 October 2016) using the search terms insulin, metformin, rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, glyburide, glipizide, glimepiride, acarbose, miglitol, albiglutide, exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, dulaglutide, pramlintide, meglitinide, alogliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, colesevalam, bromocriptine, mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure (HF), and stroke. Trials were included if they were randomized clinical trials evaluating adult patients (≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes; had a period of intervention and follow-up of ≥12 months; and assessed CV outcomes (CV death, fatal/non-fatal MI or HF) as endpoints. Twenty-three randomized trials were included.

Antidiabetic agents: Of agents approved prior to 2008, metformin has not been associated with measurable harm in patients with diabetes in terms of mortality and CV events (and has a trend of benefit). Controversial results existed with the use of sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) for CV outcomes. Among agents approved after 2008, liraglutide and empagliflozin have been shown to be superior to placebo in improving CV outcomes.

Conclusions: The FDA regulatory mandate to demonstrate CV safety in order to approve new diabetes drugs led to an increase in the number of CV outcome trials. However, these trials have placebo-controlled, non-inferiority designs aiming to show absence of CV toxicity. More studies are needed to address other questions, including comparative effectiveness, and longer-term risk versus benefits.     

Cardiovascular safety of liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Introduction: Liraglutide is a GLP-1 RA that is an option for treatment of T2DM. Typical of all new glucose-lowering agents, its CV safety profile is of great interest.

Areas covered: This article outlines the efficacy of the GLP-1 RA liraglutide from RCTs, moving through the pivotal phase 3 LEAD trials, and subsequent meta-analyses to assess CV safety. This review describes evolution of regulatory requirements to obtain safety information through dedicated CVOTs.

Expert opinion: Since the FDA mandated that CV outcomes for new diabetes therapies should be assessed via a dedicated CVOT, opinion of their utility in T2DM evolved from cynicism through to enthusiasm. In LEADER, liraglutide became the second modern glucose-lowering agent to demonstrate significant CV benefit. CVOTs are now providing important answers, highlighting the CV benefits of modern glucose-lowering agents, but also raising several questions, notably whether the effects seen with liraglutide and empagliflozin are class-effects or are unique to these molecules. Furthermore it is unknown if these results in patients with high CV risk are applicable to all patients with T2DM, and should be incorporated into new treatment guidelines. In our view it’s prudent to suggest that CVOT findings cannot currently be extrapolated to the whole T2DM population.     

The pharmacological management of metabolic syndrome

Introduction: The metabolic syndrome includes a constellation of several well-established risk factors, which need to be aggressively treated in order to prevent overt type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. While recent guidelines for the treatment of individual components of the metabolic syndrome focus on cardiovascular benefits as resulted from clinical trials, specific recent recommendations on the pharmacological management of metabolic syndrome are lacking. The objective of present paper was to review the therapeutic options for metabolic syndrome and its components, the available evidence related to their cardiovascular benefits, and to evaluate the extent to which they should influence the guidelines for clinical practice.

Areas covered: A Medline literature search was performed to identify clinical trials and meta-analyses related to the therapy of dyslipidemia, arterial hypertension, glucose metabolism and obesity published in the past decade.

Expert commentary: Our recommendation for first-line pharmacological are statins for dyslipidemia, renin-angiotensin-aldosteron system inhibitors for arterial hypertension, metformin or sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) for glucose intolerance, and the GLP-1RA liraglutide for achieving body weight and waist circumference reduction.     

Efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Introduction: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease with increasing prevalence in most countries. The majority of patients with T2D have inadequate glycaemic control, which increases the risk of diabetic complications later in life. New therapies with improved safety profiles are required to tackle the progressive nature of T2D.

Areas covered: The efficacy and safety profile of IDegLira – a once-daily, fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), for the treatment of T2D – has been extensively evaluated. IDegLira’s phase 3 clinical trial programme builds upon the clinical programmes of its mono-components, and their cardiovascular outcomes trials. The results are described here, focusing on different patient populations and compared with alternative insulin regimens.

Expert opinion: IDegLira provides superior glycaemic control and mitigates the primary adverse effects associated with insulin therapy (weight gain and hypoglycaemia) and GLP-1RAs (gastrointestinal side effects) with no indication of additive effects. Accordingly, co-formulations such as IDegLira are likely to be increasingly preferred over stepwise addition and titration of the individual agents in the management of T2D.     

The cardiovascular effect of incretin-based therapies among type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective: To evaluate the comparative cardiovascular safety of incretin-based therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and www.clinicaltrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with duration≥12 weeks. Network meta-analysis was performed, followed by subgroup analysis and meta-regression. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence. The outcome of interest was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated as the measure of effect size.

Results: 281 RCTs (76.9% double-blinded) with 180,000 patients were included, comparing incretin-based therapies with other six classes of anti-diabetic drugs or placebo. A statistically significant reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events was found in favour of GLP-1RAs when compared with placebo (OR 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80–0.99) and sulfonylurea (OR 0.76, 95%CI: 0.59–0.99), whereas DPP-4 inhibitors showed a neutral effect compared with placebo (OR 0.92, 95%CI: 0.83–1.01).

Conclusions: Incretin-based therapies show similar cardiovascular risk in comparison with metformin, insulin, thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitor and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2. GLP-1RA could decrease the risk compared with sulfonylurea or placebo, while DPP-4I appears to have neutral effect on cardiovascular risk.     

Cardiovascular safety of therapies for type 2 diabetes

Introduction: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogs and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are relatively new therapies for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Given the high prevalence of cardiovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes and recent concerns questioning CV safety of newer antidiabetic medications, cardiovascular safety of these medications requires evaluation.

Areas covered: Cardiovascular effects of these drug classes from preclinical and clinical data as well as non-cardiovascular safety issues are delineated from literature searches covering the last decade and up to June 2016. Major clinical trials assessing the cardiovascular safety of GLP-1 agonists (ELIXA and LEADER), DPP-4 inhibitors (SAVOR-TIMI 53, EXAMINE, and TECOS) and SGLT2 inhibitors (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) are reviewed and interpreted.

Expert opinion: Based on review of the present evidence, these 3 classes of antihyperglycemic therapies have acceptably safe CV safety profiles for patients with type 2 diabetes. The latest evidence from LEADER and EMPA-REG OUTCOME trials indicate that liraglutide and empagliflozin have cardiovascular benefits that may prove to be of clinical importance in the management of type 2 DM.     

Clinical trial transparency update: an assessment of the disclosure of results of company-sponsored trials associated with new medicines approved in Europe in 2012

Background:

The objective of this study was to assess the timely disclosure of results of company-sponsored clinical trials related to all new medicines approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) during 2012. This is an extension of the previously reported study of trials related to all new medicines approved in Europe in 2009, 2010 and 2011, which found that over three-quarters of all these trials were disclosed within 12 months and almost 90% were disclosed by the end of the study.

Methods:

The methodology used was exactly as previously reported. Various publicly available information sources were searched for both clinical trial registration and disclosure of results. All completed company-sponsored trials related to each new medicine approved for marketing by the EMA in 2012, carried out in patients and recorded on a clinical trials registry and/or included in an EMA European Public Assessment Report (EPAR), were included. Information sources were searched between 1 May and 31 July 2014.

Outcome measures and results:

The main outcome measure was the proportion of trials for which results had been disclosed on a registry or in the scientific literature either within 12 months of the later of either first regulatory approval or trial completion, or by 31 July 2014 (end of survey). Of the completed trials associated with 23 new medicines licensed to 17 different companies in 2012, results of 90% (307/340) had been disclosed within 12 months, and results of 92% (312/340) had been disclosed by 31 July 2014.

Conclusions:

The disclosure rate within 12 months of 90% suggests the industry is now achieving disclosure in a timely manner more consistently than before. The overall disclosure rate at study end of 92% indicates that the improvement in transparency amongst company-sponsored trials has been maintained in the trials associated with new medicines approved in 2012.     

Potential side effects to GLP-1 agonists: understanding their safety and tolerability

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1Rx) agonists might elicit unwelcome side effects and concerns have recently been raised about their safety.

Areas covered: Available evidence about safety, tolerability and potential adverse events relative to GLP-1Rx agonists presently used. We searched the MEDLINE database using the terms: ‘GLP-1 receptor agonists’, ‘Incretin therapy side effects’, ‘exenatide’, ‘ liraglutide’, ‘exenatide long-acting release’, ‘lixisenatide’. Articles were selected on the basis of the study design and importance, in the light of authors’ clinical experience and personal judgment. The main safety concern about GLP-1Rx agonists use is the possible association with increased risk of pancreatitis and/or tumors. This concern stems mainly from limited observations in animal models not confirmed in similar studies. Furthermore, clinical studies reporting association between GLP-1Rx agonist use and pancreatitis/cancer are marred by several biases and both clinical trials and post-marketing analyses failed to demonstrate a significant association.

Expert opinion: As stated by both FDA and EMA, the safety concerns emerged so far about GLP-1RX agonists should not affect present prescribing habits. Thus, although a strict data monitoring must be encouraged, they should not prevent access to the benefits of an innovative treatment, such as GLP-1Rx agonists use, to a large diabetic population still confronted with unmet needs.     

Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of exenatide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor analogs are a group of therapeutic agents which mimic endogenous GLP-1, exerting their effect by the stimulation of the GLP-1 receptor with a wide distribution. Its activation increases insulin releasing dependent on blood glucose levels, suppression of glucagon secretion and a reduction of hepatic glucose output. It delays gastric emptying and increases satiety. Exenatide is the synthetic version of exendin-4, a natural peptide with similar properties to human GLP-1. There are two pharmaceutical forms, for subcutaneous injection: twice daily and once weekly.

Clinical practice guidelines recommend them because of a high efficacy reducing hyperglycemia, low risk of hypoglycemia and a significative weight loss effect. Gastrointestinal adverse events are the most common beside injection site-related. Their cost is the main limitation to use.

Areas covered: We review the recent literature investigating the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and efficacy-safety studies of exenatide twice daily and once weekly in type 2 diabetes

Expert opinion: GLP-1 receptor analogs are now positioned as an effective and safe drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Exenatide significally reduces HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose. Additionally, it produces moderate weight loss and decreases blood pressure. One weekly formulation may improve compliance while cost is still a limitation. EXSCEL trial has shown that, despite cardiovascular safety, exenatide do not exhibits cardiovascular benefits.     

Cardiovascular safety of oncologic agents: A double-edged sword even in the era of targeted therapies – part 1

Introduction: Patients with cancer are subject to the cardiotoxic effects of cancer therapy and as more patients survive cancer due to improved treatment they are exposed to various forms of cardiovascular (CV) disease as they age, and vice-versa. Such an interplay of age with both malignancy and CV disease may contribute to increased morbidity and mortality.

Areas covered: This two-part review considers the effects of cancer drug treatment on the CV system. In Part I, the various types of CV and cardiometabolic toxicity of anti-cancer drugs and the possible mechanisms involved are discussed. Also, among the specific oncologic agents, the CV effects of the classical agents and of the large molecule immunological agents (monoclonal antibodies, including immune checkpoint inhibitors) are detailed.

Expert opinion: Oncologic agents produce a variety of CV adverse effects, including cardiomyopathy and heart failure, peri-myocarditis, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension (HTN), cardiac arrhythmias, valvular heart disease, and pulmonary HTN. Both the oncologist and the cardiologist need to be aware of such adverse effects and of the specific agents that produce them. They need to join forces to prevent, anticipate, recognize, and manage such complications.     

Dosing strategies to optimize currently available anti-MRSA treatment options (Part 2: PO options)

Introduction: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a problematic pathogen in both outpatient and inpatient settings. Research to optimize the dosing of these agents is needed to slow the development of antimicrobial resistance and to decrease the likelihood of clinical failure.

Areas covered: This review summarizes the available data for orally administered antimicrobials routinely used as monotherapy for MRSA infections. We make recommendations and highlight the current gaps in the literature. A PubMed (1966 – Present) search was performed to identify relevant literature for this review.

Expert commentary: There is a vast divide in the amount of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data to guide dosing decisions for older MRSA agents compared with the oxazolidenones.

Five-year view: Additional retrospective data will become available for the older MRSA agents in severe MRSA infections.     

Clinical pharmacology of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy

Introduction: Five NK-1 RA formulations are commercially available to treat the delayed phase of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) occurring between days 2–5 post chemotherapy (aprepitant oral capsule and suspension, fosaprepitant intravenous infusion, netupitant/palonosetron capsules and rolapitant tablet) but no direct comparative studies have been conducted to determine their relative clinical utility.

Areas covered: Information on pharmacology and safety of the NK-1 RAs derived from PubMed showed that all bind the NK-1 receptor with high affinity and selectivity. There is substantial variation in the disposition and time course in the body of NK-1 RAs because of the differential effects of hepatic metabolism. Unlike netupitant and rolapitant, aprepitant is metabolized extensively by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Aprepitant and netupitant also both inhibit CYP3A4. Consequently, aprepitant not only has a much shorter elimination half-life than netupitant and rolapitant but also a more prolific drug interaction profile. All of the NK-1 RAs are efficacious and safe, and are suitable for use in a range of different patient populations, including those with mild or moderate hepatic or renal impairment.

Expert opinion: While discovery of NK-1 RAs represents a major breakthrough in CINV control, further work is needed to improve control of chemotherapy-induced nausea.