Pooled Analysis of Studies Evaluating Fosnetupitant and Risk Factors for Cisplatin-Induced Nausea and Vomiting During the Extended Overall Phase

Nausea and vomiting in an evolving anticancer treatment landscape: long-delayed and emetogenic antibody-drug conjugates

Nausea and vomiting are common, distressing side effects associated with chemotherapeutic regimens, resulting in reduced quality of life and treatment adherence. Appropriate antiemetic prophylaxis strategies may reduce/prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Historically, investigators assessed antiemetics up to 120 hours after chemotherapy. However, CINV can extend beyond this time. Thus, the effect of antiemetics during the long-delayed period (>120 hours) requires investigation. Emerging treatment options, including certain antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), are associated with high rates of acute and late-onset nausea and vomiting that can last for extended duration. With the increasing number of ADCs approved and in development, there is urgency to control nausea and vomiting in patients receiving these new therapies. In this narrative review, we present the emetogenic potential of ADCs and CINV in the long-delayed period along with antiemetic prophylaxis strategies used to date. We also discuss the promising role of the fixed-combination antiemetic NEPA ([fos]netupitant plus palonosetron) in controlling long-delayed nausea and vomiting, addressing characteristics that may contribute to its longer efficacy duration compared to other antiemetics. Finally, we highlight encouraging results with NEPA in patients receiving the ADCs trastuzumab deruxtecan or sacituzumab govitecan, which suggest NEPA may be an effective antiemetic prophylaxis in these settings.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fosnetupitant in patients receiving cisplatin in Japan: analysis based on real-world data

PURPOSE

Our previous study showed that the preventive effects of fosnetupitant (F-NTP) against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) were superior to those of fosaprepitant (F-APR) or aprepitant (APR). To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of F-NTP compared with F-APR or APR in Japan, a cost-utility analysis was performed.

METHODS

A decision tree model was developed based on real-world data to compare the CINV prevention ability of each neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA) in Japanese patients receiving cisplatin-based regimens. We evaluated the patients 7 days after the first course of treatment. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to examine the cost-effectiveness of the antiemetic therapy. The probabilities of health states and medical costs were derived from the results of our previous study. These cost-utility analyses were performed from the perspective of the payers.

RESULTS

The incremental QALYs of F-NTP relative to F-APR and APR were 0.00180 and 0.00153, respectively. The ICER of F-NTP relative to F-APR was 22,802.21 US dollars (USD) per QALY gained, which was lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (38,043.06 USD: 5 million Japanese Yen/QALY). Contrastingly, the ICER of F-NTP relative to APR was 40,119.64 USD/QALY, which was slightly above the WTP threshold, indicating that F-NTP may be slightly less cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

F-NTP is more cost-effective than F-APR, but slightly less cost-effective than APR.

A nurse-led multidomain intervention to improve the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with head and neck cancers: A randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of a nurse-led multidomain intervention on chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC).

METHODS

Ninety-two HNSCC patients who received cisplatin-based chemotherapy were divided into intervention group (n = 45) and control group (n = 47). The control group received usual care of CINV, which consisted of administration of antiemetics according to physicians' preference, education about CINV control and dietary recommendations provided by primary nurses. The intervention group received nurse-led, evidence-based multidomain management, including nurse-led CINV risk factors assessment, education on prevention and control of CINV, antiemetics following guidelines, dietary strategies, and relaxation therapy. The number of patients who experienced CINV was collected. The severity of CINV was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0. The influence of CINV on patient's quality of life was assessed by the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE).

RESULTS

The incidence and the severity of nausea and vomiting in the intervention group were significantly lower than those in the control group within 5 days after chemotherapy, and the scores of the dimension of nausea and vomiting in the intervention group were significantly higher than those in the control group [63.00 (50.00-63.00) vs 40.00(28.00-63.00), 63.00(63.00-63.00) vs 63.00 (43.00-63.00)], the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-led multidomain intervention can reduce the incidence and the severity of CINV in patients with HNSCC who were treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and thus reduced the influence of CINV on patients' quality of life.

THE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05792228.

Comparing the Efficacy of Fosnetupitant, an NK1 Receptor Antagonist in CDDP-Based Regimens, with That of Fosaprepitant and Aprepitant: A Retrospective Observational Study

Existing antiemetic therapy against emetic-risk agents across malignancies 24 h post-dose in the acute period in cisplatin (CDDP)-based regimens yields a satisfactory complete response (CR) rate of ≥90%. However, the control rate after 24 h in the delayed period is unsatisfactory. This study compared the efficacy of fosnetupitant (F-NTP), a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist, with that of fosaprepitant (F-APR) and aprepitant (APR) in the treatment of patients with cancer at high emetic risk due to chemotherapy. In this retrospective case-control study involving patients receiving cisplatin-containing regimens and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists, patients were divided into three groups based on prophylactic antiemetic therapy: F-NTP, F-APR, and APR. The CR rate was evaluated for each period up to 168 h and further subdivided into acute (0-24 h), delayed (24-120 h), overall (0-120 h), and beyond-delayed (120-168 h) periods. Eighty-eight patients were included in the F-NTP group, 66 in the F-APR group, and 268 in the APR group. The CR rates at 0-168 and 120-168 h after cisplatin administration were significantly higher in the F-NTP group than in the F-APR and APR groups. After adjusting for confounding factors, F-NTP use was an independent factor in the multivariate analysis. Prophylactic antiemetic therapy, including F-NTP, was effective and well-tolerated during the delayed period. The efficacy of F-NTP in managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was superior to those of F-APR and APR during the study period.