State of the Art Antiemetic Therapy for Cancer Patients

Comparison of granisetron and palonosetron in triplet anti-emetic prophylaxis in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving cisplatin-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

We compared the efficacy of first-generation granisetron and second-generation palonosetron in triplet anti-emetic prophylaxis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving cisplatin-based high emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC).

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, non-randomized, observational study was conducted between June 2018 and December 2021. Patients diagnosed with NSCLC who received triplet anti-emetic prophylactic treatment with aprepitant and dexamethasone plus granisetron or palonosetron before the first cycle of chemotherapy were included in the study. At the end of the first week after chemotherapy, the emesis scale was applied to the patients during the outpatient control. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) and total control (TC).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one patients were included in the study. Sixty-one patients were in the granisetron group and 60 patients were in the palonosetron group. CR was higher with granisetron in the acute phase (70.5% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.16; respectively) and higher with palonosetron in the delayed phase (61.7% vs. 55.7%, p = 0.5; respectively), although not statistically significant. The TC rates were also not significantly different between the groups (54.1% vs.57.6%, p = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between granisetron and palonosetron in both acute and delayed control of emesis in NSCLC patients receiving cisplatin-based HEC.

Efficacy of aprepitant as a prophylactic medication in adults with cyclic vomiting syndrome

BACKGROUND

Aprepitant is a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and recent guidelines by the American Neurogastoenterology and Motility Society recommend its use as prophylaxis in moderate-to severe cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). Data are limited to small studies in children. We aimed to determine its efficacy in adults with CVS.

METHODS

A retrospective review of CVS patients diagnosed using Rome criteria at a tertiary referral center was conducted. Drug response was defined as >50% reduction in symptoms and/or healthcare utilization. An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis was conducted.

KEY RESULTS

Of 96 patients prescribed aprepitant, 26 (27%) were unable to start due to cost/lack of insurance coverage. Of 70 receiving therapy, mean age was 33 ± 11 years; 51 (73%) were female and 56 (80%) Caucasian. The majority (93%) were refractory to other prophylactic medications. Aprepitant was taken thrice weekly in 51 (73%), daily in 16 (23%) and a few times a month in 3 (4%) due to cost. Fifty (71.4%) had a global symptom response to aprepitant. There was significant reduction in the number of CVS episodes (14.5 ± 11.7 to 6.2 ± 8.0, p < 0.0001), emergency department visits (4.2 ± 7.7 to 1.8 ± 3.4, p = 0.006), and hospital admissions (1.6 ± 3.9 to 0.8 ± 2.1, p = 0.02) in patients treated with aprepitant. Seven (10%) discontinued the drug due to minor side effects.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Aprepitant is a safe and effective prophylactic medication in adults with refractory CVS. Adequate insurance coverage is a major barrier preventing its use.

Clinical pattern and drug-related problems among colorectal cancer patients at oncology center in Ethiopia: A hospital-based study

Objective:

Despite the fact that cancer patients are highly susceptible to drug-related problems due to the effects of cytotoxic agents, data are limited due to a lack of studies on those patients. Hence, we aimed to investigate drug-related problems among patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

Method:

A registry-based cross-sectional study was conducted on colorectal cancer patients at the Felege Hiwot Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. Socio-demographic and disease-related characteristics, treatment regimens, and drug-related problems were recorded by reviewing medical records. Standard guidelines, protocols, and databases were used to evaluate the occurrence of drug-related problems and the severity of adverse drug reactions. For the analysis, Stata version 16/MP for Windows was used. Logistic regression analysis was employed to investigate the potential-associated factors of drug-related problems. A p-value ⩽ 0.05 was used to declare the statistical significance of each independent variable.

Results:

A total of 150 colorectal cancer patients were included, with a mean age of 51.4 ± 13.8 years. About 30% and 41.3% had stage II and stage III cancers, respectively. About three-quarters (73.8%) of the patients were given 5-fluorouracil-based combination regimens. The prevalence of drug-related problems was found to be 48.7%, with a mean of 2.12 ± 0.93 drug-related problems. In the Felege Hiwot Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, drug–drug interactions and adverse drug reactions were the most prevalent drug-related problems, which accounted for 50 (32.7%) and 49 (32%) cases, respectively. Being elderly (>50 years old) (p = 0.013), having co-morbidity (p = 0.001), and being on five or more medications (p = 0.002) were independent predictors of drug-related problems.

Conclusion:

Fluorouracil-based chemotherapy was the most frequently used treatment regimen. Almost, half of the colorectal cancer patients had one or more drug-related problems. About one-third of patients had adverse drug reactions and drug–drug interactions. Furthermore, age, co-morbidity status, and the number of medications used were significantly associated with drug-related problems. Clinical pharmacy services should be implemented to optimize drug therapy because the majority of colorectal cancer patients have one or more drug-related problems.

The Clinical Observation of Acupuncture Combined With Antiemetic Drugs in the Prevention and Treatment of CINV in Breast Cancer Patients

Objective

The present study aimed to explore the effectiveness of acupuncture combined with antiemetic drugs in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among breast cancer patients receiving postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the clinical records of 81 postoperative breast cancer patients at our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021. These patients were divided into the acupuncture group and the control group. The efficacy of the antiemetic drugs combined with acupuncture for CINV was analysed. The primary endpoints were total, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting grade and remission rate. Safety and overall patient quality of life were secondary endpoints.

Results

During the whole observation period, compared with the control group, the frequency of nausea and vomiting was decreased in the acupuncture group (P=0.034). And the ECOG-PS score in the acupuncture group was significantly improved (P=0.004). In addition, the adverse events, such as abdominal (12.2% vs. 5.0%, P=0.252), distention (19.5% vs. 5.0%, P=0.049), and diarrhea (9.7% vs. 0, P=0.044), were decreased by acupuncture.

Conclusions

Acupuncture combined with antiemetics could reduce the incidence of CINV, improve the quality of life of patients and reduce the incidence of adverse side effects of antiemetic drugs.

NEPA efficacy and tolerability during (neo)adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin

OBJECTIVES

This is a prospective study evaluating NEPA in patients with breast cancer (the NEPA group), who received (neo)adjuvant AC chemotherapy (consisting of doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2). The primary objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of NEPA in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The secondary objectives were to compare CINV between the NEPA group and historical controls (the APR group) who received aprepitant in an earlier prospective randomised study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

60 patients participated in the NEPA group; 62 were in the APR group. Eligibility criteria of both groups were similar, that is, Chinese patients with breast cancer who were treated with (neo)adjuvant AC. NEPA group received NEPA and dexamethasone; APR group received aprepitant, ondansetron and dexamethasone. Individuals filled in self-reported diary, visual analogue scale for nausea and Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaire.

RESULTS

Within the NEPA group, 70.0%, 85.7% and 60.0%, respectively reported complete response in the acute, delayed and overall phases in cycle 1 AC. When compared with the historical APR group during cycle 1 AC, NEPA group achieved significantly higher rates of complete response, complete protection, total control, 'no significant nausea' and 'no nausea' in the delayed phase; similar findings were noted in the overall phase with significantly better quality of life. Superior efficacy of NEPA was maintained over multiple cycles. Both antiemetic regimens were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In this study on Chinese patients with breast cancer who were uniformly receiving AC, NEPA was effective in controlling CINV.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03386617.

Identification of optimal contemporary antiemetic prophylaxis for doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in Chinese cancer patients: post-hoc analysis of 3 prospective studies

OBJECTIVE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common with doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy. Recommended antiemetic regimens incorporate neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA), 5-hydroxytryptamine type-3 receptor antagonist (5HT3RA), corticosteroid, and dopamine antagonists. This post-hoc analysis compared results of 3 prospective antiemetic studies conducted among Chinese breast cancer patients who received (neo)adjuvant AC, in order to identify optimal antiemetic prophylaxis.

METHODS

A total of 304 patients were included: Group 1, ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1); Group 2, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1); Group 3, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1-3); Group 4, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1-3)/olanzapine; and Group 5, netupitant/palonosetron/dexamethasone (D1-3). Antiemetic efficacies of Groups 3, 4, and 5 during cycle 1 of AC were individually compared with Group 1. In addition, emesis outcomes of patients in Groups 3 and 5, and those of Groups 2 and 3, were compared.

RESULTS

When comparing efficacies of a historical doublet (5HT3RA/dexamethasone) with triplet antiemetic regimens (NK1RA/5HT3RA/dexamethasone) with/without olanzapine, complete response (CR) percentages and quality of life (QOL) in overall phase of cycle 1 AC were compared between Group 1 and the other groups: Group 1 vs. 3, 41.9% vs. 38.3% (P = 0.6849); Group 1 vs. 4, 41.9% vs. 65.0% (P = 0.0107); and Group 1 vs. 5, 41.9% vs. 60.0% (P = 0.0460). Groups 4 and 5 achieved a better QOL. When comparing netupitant-based (Group 3) with aprepitant-based (Group 5) triplet antiemetics, CR percentages were 38.3% vs. 60.0%, respectively (P = 0.0176); Group 5 achieved a better QOL. When comparing 1 day (Group 2) vs. 3 day (Group 3) dexamethasone, CR percentages were 46.8% and 38.3%, respectively (P = 0.3459); Group 3 had a worse QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant-containing triplets were non-superior to doublet antiemetics. Netupitant-containing triplets and adding olanzapine to aprepitant-containing triplets were superior to doublets. Netupitant/palonosetron/dexamethasone was superior to aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone. Protracted administration of dexamethasone provided limited additional benefit.

A randomized study of olanzapine-containing versus standard antiemetic regimens for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Chinese breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVES

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are distressing symptoms. This randomized study evaluated the antiemetic efficacies of standard antiemetic regimen with/without olanzapine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were chemotherapy-naive Chinese breast cancer patients who were planned for (neo)adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide. Antiemetic regimen for all studied population included aprepitant, ondansetron and dexamethasone; patients were randomized to Olanzapine (with olanzapine) or Standard arms (without olanzapine). Patients filled in self-reported diaries and completed visual analogue scales for nausea, as well as Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaires. Blood profiles including fasting glucose and lipids were monitored.

RESULTS

120 patients were randomized. In Cycle 1 doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, the Olanzapine arm had significantly higher rates of "Complete Response" than the Standard arm: 65.0% vs 38.3% in the overall period (p = 0.0035), 70.0% vs 51.7% in the acute period (p = 0.0397) and 92.9% vs 74.2% in the delayed period (p = 0.0254). Olanzapine arm also had significantly higher rates of "No significant nausea" and "No nausea" during all 3 time-frames and better QOL. Similar findings were also revealed throughout multiple cycles. Pre-study abnormalities in glucose and lipids occurred in 39.7% and 34.2% of the studied population respectively; there were no differences in these parameters between the two arms at end-of-study assessment.

CONCLUSION

The addition of olanzapine to standard aprepitant-based antiemetic regimen provides clinically meaningful improvement in controlling CINV. This was associated with a positive impact on QOL and tolerable toxicity profiles among Chinese breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy. Further studies on metabolic profiles of breast cancer patients are warranted.

Comparison of palonosetron and granisetron in triplet antiemetic therapy in nonmetastatic breast cancer patients receiving high emetogenic chemotherapy: a multicenter, prospective, and observational study

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the efficacy of 0.25 mg dose of palonosetron and granisetron in triplet antiemetic prophylaxis in breast cancer patients receiving HEC.

METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer who received HEC [doxorubicin or epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC/EC)] were enrolled in the study. The prophylactic triplet antiemetic regimens were used according to the doctor's preference during the first cycle of HEC as intravenous dexamethasone and palonosetron 0.25 mg or granisetron 3 mg on day 1 as well as oral aprepitant (125 mg on day 1 and 80 mg on days 2 and 3).The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CR) on acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), separately.

RESULTS

A total of 118 female patients were included in the study. Patients received AC (83%), EC (3%), and dose-dense AC (14%) as adjuvant (88%) or neoadjuvant (12%). The majority of patients received palonosetron (59%) containing antiemetic treatment. The CR rate on acute and delayed vomiting was very high and not statistically different in both of the arms (acute 87% vs. 96%, p = 0.089; delayed 90% vs. 92%, p = 0.489), respectively. Nevertheless, the CR rate on either acute or delayed nausea was lower than vomiting (acute 51% vs. 51%; delayed 38% vs. 29%, p = 0.203; respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the second study that compared a 0.25 mg dose of palonosetron with first-generation setron in triplet antiemetic prophylaxis in cancer patients receiving HEC. We could not find meaningful statistical differences between two arms, regarding CR rate on acute and delayed CINV.

Photochemotherapeutic Properties of a Linear Tetrapyrrole Palladium(II) Complex displaying an Exceptionally High Phototoxicity Index

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) represents a minimally invasive and highly localized treatment strategy to ablate tumors with few side effects. In PDT, photosensitizers embedded within tumors are activated by light and undergo intersystem crossing, followed by energy transfer to molecular oxygen, resulting in the production of toxic singlet oxygen (¹O₂). Previously, we reported a robust, linear tetrapyrrole palladium(II) complex, Pd[DMBil1], characterized by its facile and modular synthesis, broad absorption profile, and efficient ¹O₂ quantum yield of Φ_Δ = 0.8 in organic media. However, the insolubility of this porphyrinoid derivative in aqueous solution prevents its use under biologically relevant conditions. In this work, we report the synthesis of Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀, a water-soluble dimethylbiladiene derivative that is appended with a poly(ethylene) glycol (PEG) functionality. Characterization of this complex shows that this PEGylated biladiene architecture maintains the attractive photophysical properties of the parent complex under biologically relevant conditions. More specifically, the absorption profile of Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ closely matches that of Pd[DMBil1] and obeys the Beer-Lambert Law, suggesting that the complex does not aggregate under biologically relevant conditions. Additionally, the emission spectrum of Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ retains the fluorescence and phosphorescence features characteristic of Pd[DMBil1]. Importantly, the PEGylated photosensitizer generates ¹O₂ with Φ_Δ = 0.57, which is well within the range to warrant interrogation as a potential PDT agent for treatment of cancer cells. The Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ is biologically compatible, as it is taken up by MDA-MB-231 triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells and has an effective dose (ED₅₀) of only 0.354 μM when exposed to λ_ex > 500 nm light for 30 min. Impressively, the lethal dose (LD₅₀) of Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ without light exposure was measured to be 1.87 mM, leading to a remarkably high phototoxicity index of ∼5300, which is vastly superior to existing photosensitizers that form the basis for clinical PDT treatments. Finally, through flow cytometry experiments, we show that PDT with Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ induces primarily apoptotic cell death in MDA-MB-231 cells. Overall these results demonstrate that Pd[DMBil1]-PEG₇₅₀ is an easily prepared, biologically compatible, and well-tolerated photochemotherapeutic agent that can efficiently drive the photoinduced apoptotic death of TNBC cells.