Comparison of the 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (serotonin) antagonist ondansetron (GR 38032F) with high-dose metoclopramide in the control of cisplatin-induced emesis

Bibliometric and visual analysis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2004-2023)

Background

Patients undergoing chemotherapy often encounter troubling and common side effects, notably Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This side effect not only impairs the patient's quality of life but could also result in the interruption or discontinuation of the chemotherapy treatment. Consequently, research into CINV has consistently remained a focal point in the realm of clinical medicine. In this research domain, bibliometric analysis has not been conducted. The purpose of this study is to deliver a thorough summary of the knowledge framework and key areas of interest in the field of Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, using bibliometric methods. This approach aims to furnish novel concepts and pathways for investigators working in this area.

Methods

Publications focusing on Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, spanning from 2004 to 2023, were identified using the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database. Tools such as VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and the R package "bibliometrix" were employed for this bibliometric analysis.

Results

This research covers 734 publications from 61 countries, with the United States and China being the primary contributors. There has been a significant rise in the volume of papers published in the most recent decade compared to the one before it, spanning over the past twenty years. However, the annual publication rate in the last ten years has not shown a significant upward trend. The University of Toronto, Merck & Co., Sun Yat-sen University, and Helsinn Healthcare SA emerged as the principal research institutions in this field. Supportive Care in Cancer stands out as the most frequently published and cited journal in this domain. These works are contributed by 3,917 authors, with Rudolph M Navari, Matti Aapro, Shimokawa Mototsugu, and Lee Schwartzberg being among those who have published the most. Paul J. Hesketh is notably the most co-cited author. The primary focus of this research field lies in exploring the mechanisms of CINV and the therapeutic strategies for managing it. Key emerging research hotspots are represented by terms such as "Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting," "nausea," "vomiting," "chemotherapy," and "antiemetics."

Conclusion

This represents the inaugural bibliometric study to thoroughly outline the research trends and advancements in the field of CINV. It highlights the latest research frontiers and trending directions, offering valuable insights for scholars engaged in studying CINV.

Nonsurgical Treatment Strategies for Elderly Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Emerging Subject Worldwide

Consistent with the increasing rate of head and neck cancers among elderly adults, there has been an increase in the rate of those receiving nonsurgical treatments to maintain their function and quality of life. However, various problems, such as poor tolerance to chemoradiotherapy-related toxicity, are of greater concern in elderly adults than in younger individuals. In this review, we describe adverse events that should be particularly noted in elderly patients and provide an overview of countermeasures in nonsurgical treatments. We mainly focus on cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy-the primary treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Furthermore, we review the molecular targeted drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors for elderly patients with HNSCC. Although the number of older patients is increasing worldwide, clinical trials aimed at determining the standard of care typically enroll younger or well-conditioned elderly patients. There is still very little evidence for treating elderly HNSCC older patients, and the question of optimal treatment needs to be explored.

Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in the Older Patient: Optimizing Outcomes

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are still two of the most feared side effects of cancer therapy. Although major progress in the prophylaxis of CINV has been made during the past 40 years, nausea in particular remains a significant problem. Older patients have a lower risk of CINV than younger patients, but are at a higher risk of severe consequences of dehydration and electrolyte disturbances following emesis. Age-related organ deficiencies, comorbidities, polypharmacy, risk of drug–drug interactions, and lack of compliance all need to be addressed in the older patient with cancer at risk of CINV. Guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the prophylaxis of CINV, but none of these guidelines offer specific recommendations for older patients with cancer. This means that the recommendations may lead to overtreatment in some older patients. This review describes the development of antiemetic prophylaxis of CINV focusing on older patients, summarizes recommendations from antiemetic guidelines, describes deficiencies in our knowledge of older patients, summarizes necessary precautions, and suggests some future perspectives for antiemetic research in older patients.

Pharmacokinetic profile of the selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron in the rat: an original study and a minireview of the behavioural pharmacological literature in the rat

The availability of agonists and antagonists to modulate the activity of the 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) type 3 (5-HT3) receptor has renewed interest in its role as a therapeutic target. Ondansetron is a highly selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that is well tolerated as an anti-emetic for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Preclinical studies in rat have shown the effects of small doses of ondansetron on cognition, behavioural sensitisation, and epilepsy. However, the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of ondansetron in rat has not been described, which limits the translational relevance of these findings. Here, we aim to determine, in the rat, the PK profile of ondansetron in the plasma and to determine associated brain levels. The plasma PK profile was determined following acute subcutaneous administration of ondansetron (0.1, 1, and 10 μg/kg). Brain levels were measured following subcutaneous administration of ondansetron at 1 μg/kg. Plasma and brain levels of ondansetron were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry. Following administration of all three doses, measured ondansetron plasma levels (≈30–3000 pg/mL) were below levels achieved with doses usually administered in the clinic, with a rapid absorption phase and a short half-life (≈30–40 min). We also found that brain levels of ondansetron at 1 μg/kg were significantly lower than plasma levels, with brain to plasma ratios of 0.45 and 0.46 in the motor and pre-frontal cortices. We discuss our findings in the context of a minireview of the literature. We hope that our study will be helpful to the design of preclinical studies with therapeutic end-points.

Anti-dyskinetic efficacy of 5-HT3 receptor antagonist in the hemi-parkinsonian rat model

Parkinson's disease is a progressive debilitative neurodegenerative disease characterised mostly with bradykinesia, tremor, catatonia, drooping posture, unsteady gate and unstable steps. Levodopa has been proven to be among the most effective and acceptable treatment that can reconstitute dopamine in Parkinson's disease. However, there is a relation between levodopa long term administration and dyskinesia. Regarding the effectiveness of ondansetron in Parkinson's disease, we planned to test its effect on levodopa-induced dyskinesia (LID). In this study, Parkinsonism was induced in 40 adult male rats using 6-OHDA injection into the striatum via stereotaxic surgery. After 2 weeks, all animals tested for Parkinson's disease using apomorphine rotation test. Then, animals with positive symptoms for Parkinsonism divided into 4 equal groups, the first group treated with levodopa 50 mg/kg i.p, the second group received only distilled water, the third and forth groups treated with levodopa 50 mg/kg i.p plus two different doses of ondansetron (0.04 and 0.08 mg/kg i.p) for 3 weeks. Animals tested for dyskinesia using AIMs and rotarod tests at specific days and a week after discontinuation of ondansetron. Evaluations of AIMs test showed significant changes in dyskinetic movements and reduction in scores in groups treating with ondansetron when compared with the first group. Upon discontinuations of ondansetron in the last two groups, AIMs scores significantly increased. While in rotarod test, ondansetron had no additional benefit when added to levodopa in motor coordination of animals. Findings of this study suggest that co administration of ondansetron with levodopa is effective in attenuating dyskinesia.

Cisplatin: The first metal based anticancer drug

Cisplatin or (SP-4-2)-diamminedichloridoplatinum(II) is one of the most potential and widely used drugs for the treatment of various solid cancers such as testicular, ovarian, head and neck, bladder, lung, cervical cancer, melanoma, lymphomas and several others. Cisplatin exerts anticancer activity via multiple mechanisms but its most acceptable mechanism involves generation of DNA lesions by interacting with purine bases on DNA followed by activation of several signal transduction pathways which finally lead to apoptosis. However, side effects and drug resistance are the two inherent challenges of cisplatin which limit its application and effectiveness. Reduction of drug accumulation inside cancer cells, inactivation of drug by reacting with glutathione and metallothioneins and faster repairing of DNA lesions are responsible for cisplatin resistance. To minimize cisplatin side effects and resistance, combination therapies are used and have proven more effective to defect cancers. This article highlights a systematic description on cisplatin which includes a brief history, synthesis, action mechanism, resistance, uses, side effects and modulation of side effects. It also briefly describes development of platinum drugs from very small cisplatin complex to very large next generation nanocarriers conjugated platinum complexes.

Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Vomiting: A Double Blind, Randomized Crossover Study to Compare Pancopride (LAS 30451) and Pancopride plus Dexamethasone

Aims

Pancopride (PNC) is a new 5HT3 receptor antagonist which has demonstrated complete protection from nausea and vomiting in 25-73% of patients treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy. A double-blind, randomized crossover study was carried out to assess whether the addition of dexamethasone (DXM) to PNC increases the antiemetic efficacy.

Methods

PNC (0.2 mg/kg. i.v. 30 min before chemotherapy) plus placebo (PLC) was compared with PNC (same dose and schedule) plus DXM (20 mg. i.v. immediately before PNC). In the second cycle, patients received the alternative antiemetic treatment. Eighty patients were included in the study (PNC+DXM=39, PNC+PLC=41), 29 of whom were women and 51 men. Fifty-four percent of the patients in the PNC+DXM group and 59% of those in the PNC+PLC group received chemotherapy containing cisplatin. Seventy-seven patients completed the first cycle and 70 the second.

Results

Complete protection was obtained in 19/16 patients (50/46%) with PNC+PLC and in 32/22 (82/63%) with PNC+DXM (P<0.001). Latency was significantly longer in the PNC+DXM group. The efficacy of both treatments was unaffected by the order of administration. Side effects were mild in both groups.

Conclusions

The combination of PNC+DXM is more efficacious than PNC+PLC in protection against highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced vomiting.

Antiemetic Activity of Oral Lorazepam in Addition to Methylprednisolone and Metoclopramide in the Prophylactic Treatment of Vomiting Induced by Cisplatin. A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study with Crossover Design

Aims and Backgorund

It has been suggested that lorazepam has a definite role as an antiemetic drug in antiemetic cocktails. In this study we examined the antiemetic efficacy of metoclopramide (200 mg) and methylprednisolone (1000 mg) with or without lorazepam.

Methods

Sixty patients treated with cisplatin-containing regimens were entered into a randomized, double-blind study with cross-over. Lorazepam 2.5 mg or placebo were administered orally the evening before therapy and just after the beginning of fluid infusion for chemotherapy. Degree of nausea and number of vomiting episodes, together with somnolence, were recorded on a data flow sheet and visual-analogue scales.

Results

100 cycles (50 patients) are evaluable. In 39 cycles there was no nausea and vomiting, in 74 cycles acceptable control of emesis was reached (0-2 episodes of vomiting), without significant differences among the two arms. However, nausea was shorter in lorazepam arm (p < 0.01), and 80 % of the patients preferred treatment with lorazepam (p < 0.003). Anxiety was reduced in the patients treated with lorazepam (p < 0.4).

Conclusions

Lorazepam improves tolerability to cisplatin-containing chemotherapy, mainly by influencing the psychological status of the patient and favoring the amnestic process.

Platinum transfer from hCTR1 to Atox1 is dependent on the type of platinum complex

In spite of their wide application, the cellular uptake of platinum based anticancer drugs is still unclear. The copper transport protein, hCTR1, is proposed to facilitate the cellular uptake of cisplatin, whereas organic cation transport (OCT) is more important for oxaliplatin. It has been reported that both N-terminal and C-terminal metal binding motifs of hCTR1 are highly reactive to cisplatin, which is the initial step of protein assisted cellular uptake of cisplatin. It is still unknown how the platinum drugs in hCTR1 transfer to cytoplasmic media, and whether various platinum complexes possess different activities in this process. Herein, we investigated the reaction of the platinated C-terminal metal binding motif of hCTR1 (C8) with the down-stream protein Atox1. Results show that Atox1 is highly reactive to the platinated C8 adducts of cisplatin and transplatin, whereas the oxaliplatin/C8 adduct is much less reactive. The platinum transfer from C8 to Atox1 occurs in the reaction, which results in the protein unfolding of Atox1. These results demonstrated that the platinated intracellular-domain of hCTR1 is reactive to Atox1, and the reactivity is dependent on the ligand and the coordination structure of platinum complexes. The different reactivity is consistent with the hypothesis that hCTR1 is more significant in the transport of cisplatin than that of oxaliplatin.

Aromatherapy Versus Oral Ondansetron for Antiemetic Therapy Among Adult Emergency Department Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We compare aromatherapy with inhaled isopropyl alcohol versus oral ondansetron for treating nausea among emergency department (ED) patients not requiring immediate intravenous access.

METHODS

In a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled a convenience sample of adults presenting to an urban tertiary care ED with chief complaints including nausea or vomiting. We randomized subjects to 1 of 3 arms: inhaled isopropyl alcohol and 4 mg oral ondansetron, inhaled isopropyl alcohol and oral placebo, and inhaled saline solution placebo and 4 mg oral ondansetron. The primary outcome was mean nausea reduction measured by a 0- to 100-mm visual analog scale from enrollment to 30 minutes postintervention. Secondary outcomes included receipt of rescue antiemetic medications and adverse events.

RESULTS

We enrolled 122 subjects, of whom 120 (98.3%) completed the study. Of randomized subjects, 40 received inhaled isopropyl alcohol and oral ondansetron, 41 received inhaled isopropyl alcohol and oral placebo, and 41 received inhaled saline solution placebo and oral ondansetron. The mean decrease in nausea visual analog scale score in each arm was 30 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 22 to 37 mm), 32 mm (95% CI 25 to 39 mm), and 9 mm (95% CI 5 to 14 mm), respectively. The proportions of subjects who received rescue antiemetic therapy in each arm were 27.5% (95% CI 14.6% to 43.9%), 25.0% (95% CI 12.7% to 41.2%), and 45.0% (95% CI 29.3% to 61.5%), respectively. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Among ED patients with acute nausea and not requiring immediate intravenous access, aromatherapy with or without oral ondansetron provides greater nausea relief than oral ondansetron alone.

Anti-nausea effects and pharmacokinetics of ondansetron, maropitant and metoclopramide in a low-dose cisplatin model of nausea and vomiting in the dog: a blinded crossover study

BACKGROUND

Nausea is a subjective sensation which is difficult to measure in non-verbal species. The aims of this study were to determine the efficacy of three classes of antiemetic drugs in a novel low dose cisplatin model of nausea and vomiting and measure change in potential nausea biomarkers arginine vasopressin (AVP) and cortisol. A four period cross-over blinded study was conducted in eight healthy beagle dogs of both genders. Dogs were administered 18 mg/m² cisplatin intravenously, followed 45 min later by a 15 min infusion of either placebo (saline) or antiemetic treatment with ondansetron (0.5 mg/kg; 5-HT₃ antagonist), maropitant (1 mg/kg; NK₁ antagonist) or metoclopramide (0.5 mg/kg; D₂ antagonist). The number of vomits and nausea associated behaviours, scored on a visual analogue scale, were recorded every 15 min for 8 h following cisplatin administration. Plasma samples were collected to measure AVP, cortisol and antiemetic drug concentrations.

RESULTS

The placebo treated group vomited an average number of 7 times (range 2-13). None of the dogs in either the ondansetron or maropitant treated groups vomited during the observation period. The onset of nausea-like behaviour in the placebo-treated group occurred at t_3.5h and peaked at t_4.75h with nausea behaviour score of 58.5 ± 4.6 mm. Ondansetron and maropitant reduced overall the area under the curve of nausea behaviour score by 90% and 25%, respectively. Metoclopramide had no effect on either vomiting or nausea. Cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting caused concomitant increases in AVP and cortisol. In the placebo-treated group, AVP and cortisol increased from t_2.5h, peaked at t_5h (11.3 ± 2.9 pmol L^-1 and 334.0 ± 46.7 nmol/L, respectively) and returned to baseline by t_8h. AVP and cortisol increases were completely prevented by ondansetron and only partially by maropitant, while metoclopramide had no effect. The terminal half-lives (harmonic mean ± pseudo SD) for ondansetron, maropitant and metoclopramide were 1.21 ± 0.51, 5.62 ± 0.77 and 0.87 ± 0.17 h respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

5-HT₃ receptor antagonist ondansetron demonstrates the greatest anti-emetic and anti-nausea efficacy of the three drugs. AVP and cortisol appear to be selective biomarkers of nausea rather than emesis, providing a means of objectively measuring of nausea in the dog.

Cisplatin in the modern era: The backbone of first-line chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

The treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be changing, but the cisplatin-based doublet remains the foundation of treatment for the majority of patients with advanced NSCLC. In this respect, changes in practice to various aspects of cisplatin use, such as administration schedules and the choice of methods and frequency of monitoring for toxicities, have contributed to an incremental improvement in patient management and experience. Chemoresistance, however, limits the clinical utility of this drug in patients with advanced NSCLC. Better understanding of the molecular mechanisms of cisplatin resistance, identification of predictive markers and the development of newer, more effective and less toxic platinum agents is required. In addition to maximising potential benefits from advances in molecular biology and associated therapeutics, modification of existing cisplatin-based treatments can still lead to improvements in patient outcomes and experiences.

A Randomized, Double-Blind Pilot Study of Dose Comparison of Ramosetron to Prevent Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Purpose. This study was conducted to determine the optimal dose titration of ramosetron to prevent the Rhodes Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching (RINVR). Methods. Patients treated with folic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin were randomized into three groups (0.3 mg, 0.45 mg, and 0.6 mg ramosetron before chemotherapy). The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics using RINVR were evaluated. Results. Seventeen, 15, and 18 patients received ramosetron at doses of 0.3 mg, 0.45 mg, and 0.6 mg, respectively. T_max (h), C_max (ng/mL), and AUC_last (ng·h/mL) were associated with dose escalation significantly, showing a reverse correlation with the RINVR during chemotherapy. Acute CINV was observed in four patients (22.2%), two patients (14.3%), and one (5.6%) patient and a delayed CINV on day 7 was found in eight (47%), three (21.4%), and five (27.8%) patients in each group. The complete response rate was increased with dose escalation (35.3%, 50.0%, and 72.2% in each group) and also showed the tendency for decreasing moderate-to-severe CINV. Conclusions. This study shows a trend regarding the dose-response relationship for ramosetron to prevent CINV, including delayed emesis. It suggested that dose escalation should be considered in patients with CINV in a subsequent cycle of chemotherapy, and an individual approach using RINVR could be useful to monitor CINV.

Add-on clinical effects of simvastatin and ondansetron in patients with schizophrenia stabilized on antipsychotic treatment: pilot study

OBJECTIVES

There is some evidence that anti-inflammatory treatment may have beneficial effects in schizophrenia and major depression. Statins are cholesterol-lowering agents but have been found to be anti-inflammatory and also decrease C-reactive protein (CRP). Ondansetron is a serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonist widely used to prevent nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. Small studies have suggested that adjunctive ondansetron is efficacious against schizophrenia symptoms. We carried out a feasibility study in schizophrenia patients (within 5 years of first diagnosis) to explore the adjunctive use of simvastatin and ondansetron on positive, negative and general psychopathology.

METHODS

This was a 12-week rater-blind placebo-controlled study. A total of 36 patients with DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia were recruited, 12 in each arm. Patients were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks using Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS).

RESULTS

Both simvastatin and ondansetron provide some evidence of a reduction in symptoms compared with treatment as usual (TAU) on PANSS total score, although this was not statistically significant. In the secondary analyses, no significant differences were seen on CGI, GAF and AIMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-inflammatory treatments have been shown to have some beneficial effects in schizophrenia. Both simvastatin and ondansetron provide some evidence of a reduction in symptoms compared with TAU. This study has led to a larger Stanley Medical Research Institute (SMRI)-funded, double-blind, randomized control trial.

Involvement of 5-HT3 receptors in pudendal inhibition of bladder overactivity in cats

In the present study, the role of 5-HT3 receptors in pudendal neuromodulation of bladder activity and its interaction with opioid receptors were investigated in anesthetized cats. The bladder was distended with either saline to induce normal bladder activity or with 0.25% acetic acid (AA) to induce bladder overactivity. Pudendal afferent nerves were activated by 5-Hz stimulation at multiples of the threshold (T) intensity for the induction of anal twitching. AA irritation significantly reduced bladder capacity to 16.5 ± 3.3% of saline control capacity, whereas pudendal nerve stimulation (PNS) at 1.5-2 and 3-4 T restored the capacity to 82.0 ± 12% (P = 0.0001) and 98.6 ± 15% (P < 0.0001), respectively. Cumulative doses (1-3 mg/kg iv) of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, eliminated low-intensity (1.5-2 T) PNS inhibition and reduced high-intensity (3-4 T) PNS inhibition of bladder overactivity. During saline distention, PNS at 1.5-2 and 3-4 T significantly increased bladder capacity to 173.2 ± 26.4% (P = 0.036) and 193.2 ± 22.5% (P = 0.008), respectively, of saline control capacity, but ondansetron (0.003-3 mg/kg iv) did not alter PNS inhibition. Ondansetron (0.1-3 mg/kg) also significantly (P < 0.05) increased control bladder capacity (50-200%) during either AA irritation or saline distention. In both conditions, the effects of low- and high-intensity PNS were not significantly different. After ondansetron (3 mg/kg) treatment, naloxone (1 mg/kg iv) significantly (P < 0.05) decreased control bladder capacity (40-70%) during either AA irritation or saline distention but failed to affect PNS inhibition. This study revealed that activation of 5-HT3 receptors has a role in PNS inhibition of bladder overactivity. It also indicated that 5-HT3 receptor antagonists might be useful for the treatment of overactive bladder symptoms.

Ondansetron and simvastatin added to treatment as usual in patients with schizophrenia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Negative symptoms and cognitive deficits are two partially-related features of schizophrenia which have a major negative impact on social function and objective quality of life. Standard drug treatments have little impact on either. There is some evidence that anti-inflammatory treatment may have beneficial effects in schizophrenia and major depression. Statins are cholesterol-lowering agents that have been found to be anti-inflammatory agents and are also known to decrease C-reactive protein (CRP). Ondansetron is a serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonist widely used to prevent nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. Small studies have suggested that ondansetron is effective as an adjunct drug in improving the symptoms of schizophrenia.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a two center, six-month, double-blind placebo controlled, factorial design study of ondansetron and/or simvastatin added to treatment as usual for patients suffering from schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, psychosis not otherwise specified or schizophreniform disorder. This will be a 2 × 2 design, with 54 patients in each cell, giving a total of 216 patients over three years. There will be a screening, a randomization and seven follow-up visits. Full clinical and neurocognitive assessments will be carried out at baseline (randomization), 14 weeks and at 26 weeks, while the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS), pill count and side effects checklist will be carried out at every visit. Simvastatin will be started at 20 mg once daily (OD), this will be increased to 40 mg after four weeks. Ondansetron will be administered in an 8 mg dose.

DISCUSSION

Anti-inflammatory treatments have been shown to have some beneficial effects in schizophrenia. Both simvastatin and ondansetron provide some evidence of a reduction in symptoms compared to treatment as usual. The aim of this study is to establish the degree of improvement in negative symptoms with the addition of ondansetron and/or simvastatin to treatment as usual.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

[corrected] ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01602029.

Effect of ginger on acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a pilot, randomized, open-label clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are among the most prevalent and disturbing side effects of chemotherapy. Therefore, there is a need for additional antiemetic agents that could effectively reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), whether alone or in combination with current standard therapies. Since clinical data on the effectiveness of ginger in patients with advanced breast cancer is lacking, the present study aimed to evaluate the effects of ginger against both acute and delayed forms of CINV in a population with advanced breast cancer as the main malignancy.

METHODS

In this pilot, randomized, open-label clinical trial, 100 women (mean age = 51.83 ± 9.18 years) with advanced breast cancer who were initially assigned to standard chemotherapy protocol with docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (the TEC regimen) were randomized to receive ginger (1.5 g/d in 3 divided doses every 8 hours) plus standard antiemetic regimen (granisetron plus dexamethasone; the ginger group) or standard antiemetic regimen alone (control group). The duration of treatment with ginger was specified to 4 days from the initiation of chemotherapy. Prevalence, score, and severity of nausea, vomiting, and retching were assessed using a simplified form of Rhodes index in the first 6 hours, between 6 to 24 hours, and days 2, 3, and 4 postchemotherapy.

RESULTS

A significantly lower prevalence of nausea was observed in the ginger group during 6 to 24 hours postchemotherapy. Despite this effect, no other significant additional benefit from ginger (1.5 g/d) was observed against prevalence or severity of nausea, vomiting, and retching in any of the assessed periods.

CONCLUSION

Addition of ginger (1.5 g/d) to standard antiemetic therapy (granisetron plus dexamethasone) in patients with advanced breast cancer effectively reduces the prevalence of nausea 6 to 24 hours postchemotherapy. However, there is no other additional advantage for ginger in reducing prevalence or severity of acute or delayed CINV.

Consensus recommendations for the prevention of vomiting and nausea following high-emetic-risk chemotherapy

In this update of our 2005 document, we used an evidence-based approach whenever possible to formulate recommendations, emphasizing the results of controlled trials concerning the best use of antiemetic agents for the prevention of emesis and nausea following anticancer chemotherapies of high emetic risk. A three-drug combination of a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor (5-HT(3)) receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant beginning before chemotherapy and continuing for up to 4 days remains the standard of care. We address issues of dose, schedule, and route of administration of five selective 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists. We conclude that, for each of these five drugs, there is a plateau in therapeutic efficacy above which further dose escalation does not improve outcome. In trials designed to prove the equivalence of palonosetron to ondansetron and granisetron, palonosetron proved superior in emesis prevention, while adverse effects were comparable. Furthermore, for all classes of antiemetic agents, a single dose is as effective as multiple doses or a continuous infusion. The oral route is as efficacious as the intravenous route of administration.

Aprepitant: drug-drug interactions in perspective

The implications of chemotherapeutic drug-drug interactions can be serious and thus need to be addressed. This review concerns the potential interactions of the antiemetic aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist indicated for use (in Europe) in highly emetogenic chemotherapy and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist and corticosteroids and (in the United States) in combination with other antiemetic agents, for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of highly emetogenic cancer chemotherapy including high-dose cisplatin. When considering use of aprepitant for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, its potential drug-drug interaction profile as a moderate inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 isoenzyme 3A4 (CYP3A4) has been a source of concern for some physicians and other health care professionals. We explore in this paper how real those concerns are. Our conclusion is that either no interaction or no clinically relevant interaction exists with chemotherapeutic agents (intravenous cyclophosphamide, docetaxel, intravenous vinorelbine) or 5-HT3 antagonists (granisetron, ondansetron, palonosetron). For relevant interactions, appropriate measures, such as corticosteroid dose modifications and extended International Normalized Ratio monitoring of patients on warfarin therapy, can be taken to effectively manage them. Therefore, the concern of negative interactions remains largely theoretical but needs to be verified with new agents extensively metabolized through the 3A4 pathway.

Palonosetron hydrochloride for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

A large number of different 5-hydroxytryptamine (HT)(3) receptor antagonists have been marketed with the indication of preventing nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy--palonosetron is the most recently developed of these. Pharmacologic studies have revealed that palonosetron has a long half-life, a high affinity for 5-HT(3) receptors, exhibits allosteric binding to 5-HT(3) receptors and possess positive cooperativity. Although interesting, pharmacologic differences are only useful if they result in clinical advantages, such as an increase in efficacy and/or an improvement in tolerability. We summarize preclinical and clinical studies of palonosetron and compare the efficacy and tolerability with the other 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists, ondansetron, granisetron and dolasetron.

Cisplatin overdose: toxicities and management

Cisplatin is one of the most widely used antineoplastic agents in the treatment of solid tumour and haematological malignancies, including cancers of the testes, ovary, bladder, head and neck, oesophagus, stomach and lung, as well as lymphoma and osteosarcoma. Its non-specific targeting commonly results in adverse effects and toxicities affecting the gastrointestinal, renal, neurological and haematological systems even when administered at standard doses. Since cisplatin-related toxicities are dose-dependent, these may be more pronounced in the setting of a cisplatin overdose, resulting in significant morbidity and/or mortality. The incidence of cisplatin overdoses is unknown; however, early-phase clinical trials utilizing high-dose cisplatin, and case reports in the overdose setting have characterized the clinical features associated with cisplatin overdoses, highlighting some therapeutic strategies for consideration. To date, no published guidelines exist for managing a cisplatin overdose. The major toxicities of a cisplatin overdose include nausea and vomiting, renal insufficiency, electrolyte abnormalities, myelosuppression, ototoxicity, peripheral neuropathy, hepatotoxicity and retinopathy. Diarrhoea, pancreatitis, seizures and respiratory failure have also been reported. No specific antidote for cisplatin exists. Key management principles and strategies to lessen toxicities include renoprotection and enhancing drug elimination with aggressive intravenous hydration with or without the use of an osmotic diuretic, and avoidance of nephrotoxic medications. Sodium thiosulfate and plasmapheresis, with or without haemodialysis support, should be strongly considered. Close monitoring of clinical and laboratory parameters, and institution of supportive therapies, including antiemetics and haematopoietic colony stimulating factor support, are warranted. Based on the current literature, experimental therapies such as amifostine, ditiocarb sodium (diethyldithiocarbamate), acetylcysteine, fosfomycin and colestipol are of limited clinical effectiveness and remain investigational. This review serves to highlight the clinical spectrum of toxicities resulting from a cisplatin overdose, to critically appraise the available literature and to present a suggested algorithmic approach for the initial management of a cisplatin overdose.

Phase III trial of casopitant, a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this phase III trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regimens containing casopitant, a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Predominantly female patients (98%) diagnosed with breast cancer (96%) who were chemotherapy-naïve and scheduled to receive an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC) -based regimen were enrolled onto this multinational, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical trial. All patients received dexamethasone 8 mg intravenously (IV) on day 1 and oral ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3. Patients were randomly assigned to a control arm (placebo), a single oral dose casopitant arm (150 mg orally [PO] on day 1), a 3-day oral casopitant arm (150 mg PO on day 1 plus 50 mg PO on days 2 to 3), or a 3-day IV/oral casopitant arm (90 mg IV on day 1 plus 50 mg PO on days 2 to 3). The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving complete response (no vomiting/retching or rescue medications) in the first 120 hours after the initiation of MEC.

RESULTS

A significantly greater proportion of patients in the single-dose oral casopitant arm, 3-day oral casopitant arm, and 3-day IV/oral casopitant arm achieved complete response (73%, 73%, and 74%, respectively) versus control (59%; P < .0001). The study did not demonstrate a reduced proportion of patients with nausea or significant nausea in those receiving casopitant. Adverse events were balanced among study arms.

CONCLUSION

All casopitant regimens studied were more effective than the control regimen. Casopitant was generally well tolerated.

Effect of casopitant, a novel NK-1 antagonist, on the pharmacokinetics of dolasetron and granisetron

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to characterize the impact of casopitant, a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist under investigation for the prevention of postoperative and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, on the pharmacokinetics of the commonly prescribed 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 3 receptor antagonists, dolasetron or granisetron.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a phase I, open-label, two-part, two-period, single-sequence study, two cohorts of healthy subjects received either oral dolasetron (100 mg once daily for 3 days) or oral granisetron (2 mg once daily for 3 days) alone (period 1) and combined with oral casopitant, 150 mg day 1, 50 mg days 2 and 3 (period 2). Pharmacokinetics of hydrodolasetron and granisetron were assessed on days 1 and 3 of each period. Log-transformed area under the curve (AUC) and Cmax were statistically analyzed by performing an analysis of variance. Eighteen subjects were enrolled in the dolasetron cohort; nine subjects were CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers (EMs) and nine subjects were CYP2D6 poor metabolizers. Nineteen subjects were enrolled in the granisetron cohort.

RESULTS

The largest changes in hydrodolasetron exposure after coadministration with casopitant were seen in CYP2D6 EMs, with a 24% increase in hydrodolasetron AUC on day 1 and 30% increase in Cmax on days 1 and 3. All other changes in hydrodolasetron exposure were <20%, and granisetron exposure was not altered to any relevant extent (<11%).

CONCLUSION

None of the changes observed are considered clinically meaningful, and coadministration of casopitant with dolasetron or granisetron was well tolerated.

Impact of casopitant, a novel NK-1 antagonist, on the pharmacokinetics of ondansetron and dexamethasone

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacokinetic interactions between casopitant (a substrate and weak to moderate inhibitor of CYP3A), dexamethasone (a substrate and weak inducer of CYP3A), and ondansetron (a mixed CYP substrate) were evaluated in a two-part, three-period, single-sequence study in two groups of healthy subjects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Part 1: subjects received oral casopitant (regimen A); oral dexamethasone and IV ondansetron (regimen B); and oral casopitant, a reduced dose of oral dexamethasone, and IV ondansetron (regimen C). Part 2: subjects received oral casopitant (regimen D); IV dexamethasone and oral ondansetron (regimen E); and oral casopitant, IV dexamethasone, and oral ondansetron (regimen F). Each regimen was separated by 14 days.

RESULTS

Casopitant AUC in regimen C was increased 28% on day 1 but decreased 34% on day 3 compared to casopitant alone in regimen A. When given with casopitant and ondansetron in regimen C, dexamethasone AUC was 17% lower on day 1, but similar on day 3, compared to regimen B (representing dose-normalized increases in exposure of 39% and 108%, respectively). Ondansetron exposure was equivalent in regimens B and C. Casopitant AUC in regimen F was similar to regimen D on days 1 and 3. Dexamethasone AUC increased 21% when given with oral casopitant and oral ondansetron (regimen F compared to regimen E). Ondansetron exposure was equivalent in regimens E and F.

CONCLUSION

When repeat-dose oral dexamethasone is to be coadministered with oral casopitant, a reduction in dexamethasone dose may be considered; however, no change in casopitant dose is required. Ondansetron exposure was not affected by coadministration with casopitant.

[Management of chemotherapy-induced emesis: what is the standard after 20 years of clinical research]

BACKGROUND

The knowledge of the importance, the physiopathological mechanisms, and the management of the chemotherapy-induced emesis has increased exponentially during the last 20 years. High-dosage metoclopramide (MCP) therapy has been introduced in the eighties and serotonine type-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT(3) antagonists) have been used since the late eighties and early nineties. Due to both classes of substances the results of the antiemetic therapies have improved drastically. After 20 years of intensive clinical research it seems to be appropriate to come to an intermediate conclusion.

METHOD

With the aid of an overview and a new analysis of the literature published on this topic so far, the current state of research is shown (including the fields in which further improvement will be necessary), and suggestions are made, wherever it seemed possible, to attain the "gold standard" in antiemetic therapy.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In connection with all highly or very highly emetogenic chemotherapies, an antiemetic prophylaxis should be initiated on the day of therapy, especially when using platinum or most of the cyclophosphamide-based regimes for cancer treatment. The recommended prophylaxis consists of a combination of 5-HT(3) antagonists with a corticosteroid. To combat the so-called delayed emesis on the days following therapy, all patients should undergo an oral corticoid therapy, possibly in combination with MCP (especially platinum-therapy patients), less frequently with 5-HT(3) antagonists. With these means of prophylaxis emesis can be prevented/avoided completely in most patients, and nausea can at least be reduced. It is sufficient to administer a single dose of 5-HT(3) antagonists prior to chemotherapy. For ondansetron and granisetron, the best documented substances within this class of drugs, 8 mg (ondansteron) and 3 mg (granisetron) are considered standard dosages. Among the corticoids, most data have been accumulated for dexamethasone. A standard dose of 10 to 20 mg can be administered prior to chemotherapy. Right after and especially on the days following chemotherapy higher dosages seem to be indicated.

PROSPECT

Further therapy improvements, especially concerning emesis and nausea on the days following chemotherapy, are necessary and are currently object of clinical research.

Circadian Rhythms in Toxic Effects of the Serotonin Antagonist Ondansetron in Mice

The aim of the study was to learn whether the lethal and the motor incoordination (ataxia) side effect of ondansetron (Zophren) administration is dosing-time dependent. Ondansetron is a serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonist used primarily to control nausea and vomiting arising from cytotoxic chemo- and radiotherapy. A total of 210 male Swiss mice 10 to 12 weeks of age were synchronized for 3 weeks by 12 h light (rest span)/12 h dark (activity span). Different doses of ondansetron were injected intraperitoneally (i.p.) at fixed times during the day to determine both the sublethal (TD50) and lethal (LD50) doses, which were, respectively, 3.7 +/- 0.6 mg/kg and 4.6 +/- 0.5 mg/kg. In the chronotoxicologic study a single dose of ondansetron (3.5 mg/kg, i.p.) was administered to different and comparable groups of animals at four different circadian stages [1, 7, 13, and 19 h after light onset (HALO)]. The lethal toxicity was statistically significantly dosing time-dependent (chi2 = 21.51, p < 0.0001). Drug dosing at 1 HALO resulted in 100% survival rate whereas drug dosing at 19 HALO was only one-half that (52%). Similarly, lowest and highest ataxia occurred when ondansetron was injected at 1 and 19 HALO, respectively (chi2 = 22.24, p < 0.0001). Effects on rectal temperature were also dosing-time related (Cosinor analysis, p < 0.0001). The characteristics of the waveform describing the temporal patterns differed between the studied variables, e.g., lethal toxicity and survival rate showing two peaks and rectal temperature showing one peak in the 24 h time series waveform pattern. Cosinor analysis also revealed a statistically significant ultradian (tau = 8 h) rhythmic component in the considered variables. Differences in curve patterns in toxicity elicited by ondansetron on a per end point basis are hypothesized to represent the phase relations between the identified 24 h and 8 h periodicities.

Casopitant: a novel NK(1)-receptor antagonist in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are among the most feared and distressing symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. The knowledge of the pathogenesis and neuropharmacology of CINV has expanded enormously over the last decades, the most significant discoveries being the role of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)(3)- and neurokinin (NK)(1) receptors in the emetic reflex arch. This has led to the development of two new classes of antiemetics acting as highly selective antagonists at one of these receptors. These drugs have had a huge impact in the protection from chemotherapy-induced vomiting, whereas the effect on nausea seems to be limited. The first NK(1) receptor antagonist, aprepitant, became clinically available in 2003, and casopitant, the second in this class of antiemetics, has now completed phase III trials. This review delineates the properties and clinical use of casopitant in the prevention of CINV.

Antiemetics: an update and the MASCC guidelines applied in clinical practice

Nausea and vomiting are two of the most severe problems for patients treated with chemotherapy. Until the late 1970s, nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy was an almost neglected research area. With the introduction of cisplatin, the cytotoxin with the highest emetic potential, research was stimulated and has now resulted in the development of two new classes of antiemetics, the serotonin and neurokinin antagonists. A large number of trials have fine-tuned antiemetic therapy and made evidence-based recommendations possible for the majority of patients receiving chemotherapy. This Review discusses the pathophysiology of nausea and vomiting, the development of antiemetics, highlights some of the newest antiemetics, and finally summarizes recommendations from the evidence-based guidelines developed by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer.

Anti-emetic therapy in cancer chemotherapy: current status

Nausea and vomiting are ranked as the most severe side effects to chemotherapy by cancer patients. Twenty years ago, treatment of nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy only had moderate effect and often unpleasant side effects. The drugs used included dopamine(2)-receptor antagonists and corticosteroids alone or combined. This review summarizes the development of anti-emetic therapy, but will focus on the importance of two new classes of anti-emetics: the serotonin(3)- and the neurokinin(1)-receptor antagonists. Furthermore, evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting will be given. The serotonin(3)-receptor antagonists, the first group of drugs developed specifically as anti-emetics, have significantly improved the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced emesis especially in combination with a corticosteroid. The improvement in the prophylaxis of nausea with this combination is however modest. A new group of anti-emetics, the neurokinin(1)-receptor antagonists, has now been developed, and the first drug, aprepitant, was marketed in 2003. Aprepitant increases the effect of a serotonin(3)-receptor antagonist plus a corticosteroid against acute emesis induced by highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and aprepitant is also active in the protection against delayed emesis. The importance of drug-drug interactions with anti-emetics and other drugs, especially cytotoxins, through their competition for cytochrome P450 enzymes, have been studied. At present, there is no evidence that such interactions are of major clinical importance. Evidence-based clinical guidelines are now available and regularly updated, but unfortunately clinical implementation is slow. Recommendations for some types of chemotherapy-induced emesis such as delayed emesis, is based on a low level of evidence. Furthermore, the majority of clinical trials include highly selected groups of patients not permitting definite conclusions for other and more heterogeneous patient groups. Development of new anti-emetics with other mechanisms of action is awaited with interest.

Palonosetron plus dexamethasone for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy for germ cell cancer

GOALS OF WORK

The aims of this study were to assess the safety and antiemetic efficacy of multiple-day dosing of palonosetron plus dexamethasone in patients receiving highly emetogenic multiple-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy for germ cell tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-one men undergoing 5-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular cancer received palonosetron 0.25 mg IV once daily 30 min before chemotherapy on days 1, 3, and 5 plus IV dexamethasone 20 mg before chemotherapy on days 1 and 2, and 8 mg PO bid on days 6 and 7 and 4 mg bid on day 8. Safety and efficacy were assessed in 24-h intervals for 9 days. Efficacy endpoints included emesis, intensity of nausea and its interference with patient functioning, and rescue antiemetic use. A subset of patients (n = 11) was studied for electrocardiograph effects and pharmacokinetic evaluation.

MAIN RESULTS

This multiple-day antiemetic regimen was safe, with headache and constipation the most common treatment-related adverse events, mostly mild. Neither adverse events nor electrocardiographic changes appeared to increase in frequency, duration, or intensity over time despite a 1.42-fold systemic accumulation of palonosetron with repeated doses. The majority of patients had no emesis at any time throughout days 1-5 (51%) or days 6-9 (83%), had no moderate-to-severe nausea, and did not require rescue medication. Most patients reported that nausea had no significant effect on daily functioning on days 1-4 (72%) and days 5-9 (85%).

CONCLUSIONS

Palonosetron on days 1, 3, and 5, along with a regimen of dexamethasone, was safe and well tolerated and effectively controlled both nausea and emesis in patients undergoing 5-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant problem for cancer patients. Aprepitant, a novel NK-1 receptor antagonist, is approved for use with 5-HT3 antagonists and corticosteroids to prevent CINV associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of standard aprepitant use has not been established.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to compare three strategies for CINV: conventional treatment with a 5-HT3 antagonist and a corticosteroid, conventional treatment plus aprepitant, and conventional treatment with aprepitant added after the onset of CINV. Data from published clinical trials provided probabilities and utilities for the model. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Federal Supply Scale provided costs for medical resources and medications utilized. Resource use data were based on a randomized clinical trial and routine clinical practice. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each aprepitant strategy was calculated in US$ per healthy day equivalent (HDE) and converted to dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in model parameters.

RESULTS

Adding aprepitant after CINV occurred cost $264 per HDE ($96,333/QALY). The three-drug strategy cost $267/HDE with a 95% confidence range of $248-$305/HDE ($97,429/QALY; $90,396-$111,239/QALY). In univariate analyses, the most influential factors on the ICER were: the cost of aprepitant, the likelihood of delayed CINV without aprepitant, the likelihood of acute CINV with/without aprepitant, and the increase in HDE from avoiding CINV.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant provides modest incremental benefits compared with conventional management of CINV. Routine aprepitant use appears most cost-effective when the likelihood of delayed CINV or the cost of rescue medications is high.