The antiemetic 5-HT3 receptor antagonist Palonosetron inhibits substance P-mediated responses in vitro and in vivo

Sex-specific modulation of the medial prefrontal cortex by glutamatergic median raphe neurons

A substantial proportion of raphe neurons are glutamatergic. However, little is known about how these glutamatergic neurons modulate the forebrain. We investigated how glutamatergic median raphe nucleus (MRN) input modulates the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), a critical component of fear circuitry. We show that vesicular glutamate transporter 3 (VGLUT3)-expressing MRN neurons activate VGLUT3- and somatostatin-expressing neurons in the mPFC. Consistent with this modulation of mPFC GABAergic neurons, activation of MRN (VGLUT3) neurons enhances GABAergic transmission in mPFC pyramidal neurons and attenuates fear memory in female but not male mice. Serotonin plays a key role in MRN (VGLUT3) neuron-mediated GABAergic plasticity in the mPFC. In agreement with these female-specific effects, we observed sex differences in glutamatergic transmission onto MRN (VGLUT3) neurons and in mPFC (VGLUT3) neuron-mediated dual release of glutamate and GABA. Our results demonstrate a cell type-specific modulation of the mPFC by MRN (VGLUT3) neurons and reveal a sex-specific role of this neuromodulation in mPFC synaptic plasticity.

Influence of menopause on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in highly emetogenic chemotherapy for breast cancer: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Female sex and younger age are reported risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in highly emetogenic chemotherapy, but the underlying mechanism has not been elucidated. The purpose of this study was to clarify the impact of menopause on CINV.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study analyzed data from consecutive patients who received their first cycle of perioperative anthracycline-based chemotherapy for breast cancer between January 2018 and June 2020. The endpoints were association between CINV (vomiting, ≥Grade 2 nausea, complete response [CR] failure) and menopause as well as the association between CINV and follicle-stimulating hormone [FSH]/estradiol [E2].

RESULTS

Data for 639 patients were analyzed. Among these patients, 109 (17.1%) received olanzapine (four antiemetic combinations) and 530 (82.9%) did not (three antiemetic combinations). Premenopausal state (amenorrhea lasting ≥12 months) was significantly associated with ≥Grade 2 nausea and CR failure in univariate analysis but not in multivariate analysis. The premenopausal FSH/E2 group (defined by serum levels; FSH <40 mIU/mL and E2 ≥20 pg/mL) had a significantly higher rate of ≥Grade 2 nausea than the postmenopausal FSH/E2 group (FSH ≥40 mIU/mL and E2 <20 pg/mL) (48.8% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that changes in FSH and E2 due to menopause may affect the severity of nausea and that FSH and E2 (especially FSH) levels might be useful indicators for CINV risk assessment.

Ocular Administration of Palonosetron in the Prevention of Cisplatin-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Cancer treatments are frequently associated with nausea and vomiting despite greatly improved preventive medication. Administration of antinausea agents as eye drops might provide easy and rapid access to the systemic circulation for prevention of nausea and vomiting and for the treatment of breakthrough nausea, but the ocular administration route has rarely been evaluated. Palonosetron is a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist approved for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. We compared ocular administration of palonosetron to non-active vehicle eye drops and to intravenous palonosetron in the prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in beagle dogs. Palonosetron ocular drops at the dose of 30 µg/kg reduced cumulative nausea over time as measured with the area under the visual analog scale curve by 98% compared with the vehicle and reduced nausea-associated dog behavior by 95%. Vomiting was completely prevented with repeated palonosetron ocular dosing. Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD) palonosetron formulation was well tolerated locally at the palonosetron concentration of 3 mg/ml. Absorption of palonosetron from eye drops was fast. Ten minutes after ocular administration, palonosetron plasma concentrations were similar compared with intravenous administration, and remained similar for six hours. We conclude that palonosetron is rapidly absorbed into the systemic circulation from eye drops. Ocularly administered palonosetron was well tolerated in the HP-β-CD formulation and was highly effective in the prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of ocular administration of palonosetron is warranted in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in clinical trials. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Palonosetron, an effective and well-tolerated antiemetic drug was rapidly absorbed into the systemic blood circulation when administered as eye drops. The achieved palonosetron blood concentrations prevented cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in beagle dogs. Palonosetron eye drops might provide an easy and quick method for administering palonosetron when parenteral administration is desired and intravenous administration is not feasible.

A Comparative Study of Palonosetron with Ondansetron for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) Following Laparoscopic Gynaecological Surgeries

Background

Incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in susceptible patients can be unacceptably high (70-80% reported incidence). This study was designed to evaluate the effect of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing PONV in high-risk patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery.

Methodology

In this randomised, controlled, double-blind trial, nonsmoking females 18-70 years and weighing 40-90 kg, scheduled for elective laparoscopic gynaecological surgeries, were enrolled into the ondansetron (Group A, n=65) or palonosetron (Group B, n=65) group. Palonosetron (1 mcg/kg 4) or ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg 4) were administered just before induction. Postoperatively, incidence of nausea, vomiting, PONV (scored on a scale of 0-3), need for rescue antiemetic, complete response, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects were evaluated for up to 48 h following surgery.

Results

The overall PONV scores and postoperative nausea score during 0-2 h and 24-48 h were comparable, but PONV scores (P=0.023) and postoperative nausea scores (P=0.010) during 2-24 h were significantly lesser in Group B compared to Group A. There was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative vomiting score or retching during 0-48 h. The amount of first-line rescue antiemetic used during 2-24 h was significantly higher in Group A (56%) than in Group B (31%) (P=0.012; P<0.05). Complete response to the drug during 2-24 h was significantly higher (P=0.023) in Group B (63%) compared to Group A (40%), whereas response was comparable during 0-2 h and 24-48 h. Both groups had comparable incidences of adverse effects and patient satisfaction scores.

Conclusion

Palonosetron has superior antinausea effect, less need of rescue antiemetics, and lesser incidence of total PONV in comparison to ondansetron during 2-24 h and comparable effect to ondansetron during the 0-2 h and 24-48 h postoperative periods in high-risk patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery.

Ferric Citrate Hydrate Has Little Impact on Hyperplasia of Enterochromaffin Cells in the Rat Small Intestine Compared to Sodium Ferrous Citrate

INTRODUCTION

The most detrimental factor preventing the use of oral iron in the treatment of iron deficiency anemia is gastrointestinal side effects accompanied by nausea and vomiting. Anorexia is a known secondary effect of nausea and vomiting. The important gastrointestinal signaling molecule 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) is critically involved in not only physiological function but also nausea and vomiting. The present study was designed to compare the effects of the administration of sodium ferrous citrate (SF) and ferric citrate hydrate (FC) to rats on anorexia and hyperplasia of enterochromaffin cells, which mainly synthesize and store 5-HT.

METHODS

Rats received either SF (3 or 30 mg/kg/day) or FC (30 mg/kg/day) orally for 4 days. Food and water intakes were measured every 24 h during the study. At 96 h after the first administration of the oral iron preparation, the duodenal and jejunal tissues were collected for analysis. Enterochromaffin cells were detected by immunohistochemical analysis.

RESULTS

Administration of 3 mg/kg SF had no effect on anorexia but led to increased hyperplasia of enterochromaffin cells in the duodenum (p < 0.1). Administration of 30 mg/kg SF significantly decreased food and water intakes and significantly increased hyperplasia of enterochromaffin cells in the duodenum and jejunum. Alternatively, administration of 30 mg/kg FC had no significant effect on food and water intakes or hyperplasia of enterochromaffin cells.

CONCLUSION

The lower impact on the hyperplasia of enterochromaffin cells of FC compared to SF may contribute to the maintenance of rats' physical condition.

A Randomised Study To Compare Palonosetron With Ondansetron for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) Following Laparoscopic Gynecological Surgeries

Background

Incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in susceptible patients can be unacceptably high (70-80% reported incidence). This study was designed to evaluate the effect of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing PONV in high-risk patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery.

Methodology

In this randomized, controlled, double-blind trial, non-smoking females aged 18-70 years, weighing 40-90 kg, and posted for elective laparoscopic gynecological surgeries were enrolled into ondansetron (Group A, n = 65) and palonosetron (Group B, n = 65) groups. Palonosetron (1 mcg/kg IV) or ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg IV) were administered just before induction. Postoperatively, the incidence of nausea, vomiting, PONV (scored on a scale of 0-3), need for rescue antiemetic, complete response, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects were evaluated up to 48 h following surgery. Normally distributed continuous variables were compared using Student’s t-test. In addition, the Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test were used to compare nominal categorical data as deemed appropriate. P-value <0.05 was observed as statistically significant.

Results

The overall PONV scores and postoperative nausea scores during 0-2 and 24-48 hours were comparable, but PONV scores (p = 0.023) and postoperative nausea scores (p = 0.010) during 2-24 hours were significantly lesser in Group B compared to Group A. There was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative vomiting score or retching during 0-48 hours. The amount of first-line rescue antiemetic used during 2-24 hours was significantly higher in Group A (56%) than in Group B (31%) (p = 0.012; p <0.05). A complete response to the drug during 2-24 hours was significantly higher (p = 0.023) in Group B (63%) compared to Group A (40%), whereas response was comparable during 0-2 and 24-48 hours. Both groups had a comparable incidence of adverse effects and patient satisfaction scores.

Conclusion

Palonosetron has a superior anti-nausea effect, less need for rescue antiemetics, and lesser incidence of total PONV compared to ondansetron during 2-24h and comparable effect to ondansetron during 0-2h and 24-48h postoperative period in high-risk patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery.

Effect and Mechanism of Herbal Medicines on Cisplatin-Induced Anorexia

Cisplatin is a well-known chemotherapeutic agent used to treat various types of cancers; however, it can also induce anorexia, which results in reduced food intake, loss of body weight, and lower quality of life. Although drugs such as megestrol acetate and cyproheptadine are used to decrease this severe feeding disorder, they can also induce side effects, such as diarrhea and somnolence, which limit their widespread use. Various types of herbal medicines have long been used to prevent and treat numerous gastrointestinal tract diseases; however, to date, no study has been conducted to analyze and summarize their effects on cisplatin-induced anorexia. In this paper, we analyze 12 animal studies that used either a single herbal medicine extract or mixtures thereof to decrease cisplatin-induced anorexia. Among the herbal medicines, Ginseng Radix was the most used, as it was included in seven studies, whereas both Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma and Angelicae Gigantis Radix were used in four studies. As for the mechanisms of action, the roles of serotonin and its receptors, cytokines, white blood cells, ghrelin, and leptin were investigated. Based on these results, we suggest that herbal medicines could be considered a useful treatment method for cisplatin-induced anorexia.

Comparison of palonosetron with combined palonosetron and midazolam for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an undesirable complication in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Combination therapy via different mechanisms of action for antiemetic prophylaxis has been warranted for effective treatment of PONV. This study was designed to compare the prophylactic antiemetic effect between midazolam combined with palonosetron (group MP) and palonosetron alone (group P) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was investigated in non-smoking female. Eighty-eight patients were randomly divided into 2 groups with 44 patients each. Group MP received 0.05 mg/kg of midazolam intravenously before induction of anesthesia whereas group P received the same volume of normal saline. Immediately after anesthetic induction, 0.075 mg of palonosetron was administered to both the groups. The incidence and severity of PONV were assessed during 2 time intervals (0-2 hours, 2-24 hours), postoperatively.

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV during 24 hours after surgery was lower in group MP as compared to group P. There was also a significant difference in the use of rescue antiemetics. The severity of nausea was significantly lower in group MP as compared to group P, in the initial 2 hours after surgery. The incidence of side effects was similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

In the prevention of PONV, midazolam combined with palonosetron, administered during induction of anesthesia was more effective as compared to palonosetron alone.

Netupitant/Palonosetron: A Review in Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA; Akynzeo^®), available in oral and intravenous (IV) formulations, is a fixed-dose combination of the neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonist netupitant (or the prodrug, fosnetupitant, in the IV formulation) and the second-generation serotonin 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonist palonosetron. Administered as a single dose, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron (in combination with dexamethasone) is indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adults. In clinical trials, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron plus dexamethasone was associated with high complete response rates (no emesis and no rescue medication) in the acute, delayed and overall phases in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, with efficacy maintained over multiple cycles. Further, oral netupitant/palonosetron was found to be superior to palonosetron and non-inferior to aprepitant plus granisetron in preventing CINV in individual trials. Both the oral and IV formulations of the drug combination are well tolerated. The fixed-dose combination is concordant with guideline recommendations and provides a simple and convenient option for prophylaxis against acute and delayed CINV in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Evaluation of clinical outcomes and efficacy of palonosetron and granisetron in combination with dexamethasone in Egyptian patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is considered one of the most serious adverse events affecting chemotherapy-receiving cancer patients. It dramatically affects their food intake, nutritional status and more importantly their quality of life. We can observe CINV in highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) such as adriamycin-cyclophosphamide combination (AC) in breast cancer patients and cisplatin-based regimens in other cancer types. This study aimed to evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of palonosetron (PALO) over granisetron (GRA) in combination with dexamethasone for multiple highly emetogenic chemotherapy drugs (HEC), especially in chemotherapy regimens in Egyptian breast cancer patients and cisplatin-based regimens in other diseases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An open-label randomized trial was carried out, including 115 patients receiving at least four cycles of highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. All patients received dexamethasone in combination with the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. We recorded patients' clinical and biochemical characteristics and withdraw blood samples to monitor serum substance P and serotonin in correlation with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). We use the MASCC antiemetic tool in the acute phase (0-24 hr) and delayed phase (24-120 h) to evaluate patient outcomes in both stages after each chemotherapy cycle.

RESULTS

In (PALO) group, only 7.84% of patients showed acute vomiting, and 11.76% showed acute nausea, whereas 43.75% of patients showed acute vomiting and 89.06% showed acute nausea in (GRA) group (P < 0.0001). For delayed CINV, 23.53% of patients showed delayed vomiting, and 47.06% showed delayed nausea in the (PALO) group, while 82.81% of patients showed delayed emesis, and 92.19% showed delayed nausea in (GRA) group (P < 0.0001). The study showed that PALO is a cost-effective choice when compared to GRA in CINV prevention as 45.10% of patients in (PALO) required additional rescue medications (Domperidone 10 mg orally three times per day plus Trimebutine 200 mg orally three times per week both for 5 days), while 95.24% in the (GRA) group used the same medications. Adverse events of both antiemetic drugs (PALO and GRA) include headaches and constipation and QTc prolongation reports, mostly mild to moderate, with relatively low rates among the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Palonosetron, combined with dexamethasone, is more effective than granisetron and dexamethasone combination against both acute and delayed emesis induced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) cisplatin-based protocols and the combination of cyclophosphamide and anthracyclines (AC). Medical team members should make more efforts, especially clinical pharmacy personnel, to monitor medications' effectiveness and help the medical team achieve a suitable and reliable care plan.

Effects of Palonosetron on Nausea and Vomiting Induced by Multiple-Day Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Study

Patients who undergo multiple-day chemotherapy sessions experience hard-to-treat nausea and vomiting. Currently, there is no effective standard treatment for this condition. This study compared the preventive effect of first-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT₃ RAs) and second-generation 5-HT₃ RAs palonosetron in multiple-day chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The design of this study was a retrospective case-control study of patients who received a five-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy and were treated with aprepitant, dexamethasone, granisetron, and ramosetron or palonosetron. The patients were divided into two groups: patients given granisetron and ramosetron (the first-generation group), and those given palonosetron (palonosetron group). The percentage of patients with a complete response or total control was assessed. They were divided into three phases: 0-216 h (overall phase), 0-120 h (remedial phase), and 120-216 h (after phase). The remedial phase was further divided into 0-24 h (early phase) and 24-120 h (later phase). Moreover, the nutritional status of each patient was assessed by noting the patients' total calorie-intake per day and total parenteral nutrition. First-generation 5-HT₃ RAs and palonosetron were used for treatment in 18 and 28 patients, respectively. The complete response rate and caloric oral intake of the later phase were higher in the palonosetron group than in the first-generation group. We conclude that palonosetron treatment was more effective than first-generation 5-HT₃ RAs in controlling multiple-day chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

An Integrated In Silico and In Vivo Approach to Identify Protective Effects of Palonosetron in Cisplatin-Induced Nephrotoxicity

Cisplatin is widely used to treat various types of cancers, but it is often limited by nephrotoxicity. Here, we employed an integrated in silico and in vivo approach to identify potential treatments for cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity (CIN). Using publicly available mouse kidney and human kidney organoid transcriptome datasets, we first identified a 208-gene expression signature for CIN and then used the bioinformatics database Cmap and Lincs Unified Environment (CLUE) to identify drugs expected to counter the expression signature for CIN. We also searched the adverse event database, Food and Drug Administration. Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), to identify drugs that reduce the reporting odds ratio of developing cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Palonosetron, a serotonin type 3 receptor (5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 3 (5-HT3R)) antagonist, was identified by both CLUE and FAERS analyses. Notably, clinical data from 103 patients treated with cisplatin for head and neck cancer revealed that palonosetron was superior to ramosetron in suppressing cisplatin-induced increases in serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen levels. Moreover, palonosetron significantly increased the survival rate of zebrafish exposed to cisplatin but not to other 5-HT3R antagonists. These results not only suggest that palonosetron can suppress CIN but also support the use of in silico and in vivo approaches in drug repositioning studies.

[Effect of palonosetron, ondansetron and dexamethasone in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in video cholecystectomy with total venous anesthesia with propofol-remifentanil - randomized clinical trial]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) after video cholecystectomy is high. Progress in pharmacological PONV prophylaxis includes a new generation of 5-HT₃ antagonists. This study aims to assess the effect of the 5-HT₃ antagonist in postanesthetic antiemetic management of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy with total intravenous anesthesia.

METHODS

Sixty individuals who underwent video cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups of 20 individuals according to the treatment administered: 0.125 mg of palonosetron (Group 1); 4 mg of ondansetron associated with 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 2); 4 mg of dexamethasone (Group 3). General intravenous anesthesia was performed with propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The group to which the participant belonged was concealed from the investigator who assessed drug effect. PONV was assessed using the Rhodes Scale at 12 and 24 hours after surgery. Rescue medication was 0.655 to 1.5 mg of droperidol.

RESULTS

Group 1 presented a lower incidence of PONV and required less rescue medication in the first postoperative hour. There was no significant difference among the three groups regarding PONV incidence in the first 12 postoperative hours. Groups 1 and 2 were superior to Group 3 regarding the control of PONV from 12 to 24 hours, and after rescue medication from 12 to 24 hours. Group 1 showed significantly superior nausea control in the first 12 postoperative hours.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed evidence that palonosetron is superior to the drugs compared regarding a protracted antiemetic effect and less requirement of rescue drugs, mainly related to its ability to completely inhibit the uncomfortable symptom of nausea.

Effect of palonosetron, ondansetron and dexamethasone in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in video cholecystectomy with total venous anesthesia with propofol-remifentanil – randomized clinical trial

Introduction and objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Oral versus intravenous palonosetron in Chinese cancer patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: A non-inferiority phase III trial

OBJECTIVE

The 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron (PALO) is approved (United States/Europe) as an oral formulation for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adult cancer patients undergoing moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) for the acute phase only, in the United States, or as intravenous (IV) formulation in patients undergoing MEC or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. This phase III study compares the efficacy/safety of oral versus IV PALO in Chinese patients.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients with solid tumours scheduled for MEC received oral PALO 0.50 mg or IV PALO 0.25 mg. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority in terms of patients with complete response in the acute phase (0-24 hr post-chemotherapy).

RESULTS

Complete response rates (acute phase), evaluated in 318/320 randomised patients, were 84.6% and 85.9% for oral and IV PALO respectively. Non-inferiority was demonstrated; the two formulations showed similar efficacy/safety.

CONCLUSION

Non-inferiority of oral versus IV PALO in the acute phase was demonstrated in Chinese patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

CTR20140711.

Every-other-day palonosetron plus aprepitant for prevention of emesis following induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia: A randomized, controlled study from the "Rete Ematologica Pugliese"

BACKGROUND

Compared with older 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, palonosetron requires fewer drug administrations to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following multiple-day chemotherapy. We conducted a phase II multicenter study comparing palonosetron plus aprepitant to palonosetron alone in patients undergoing a range of induction chemotherapy regimens for acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

METHODS

Patients were randomized to palonosetron (0.25 mg) every other day until the last dose of chemotherapy alone or with aprepitant on days 1-3. Patients mainly received an anthracycline on days 1-3 plus cytarabine administered for 5-10 days. The primary end point was complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medication) over the whole study period (days of chemotherapy plus two additional days). Unplanned analysis of time to anti-emetic treatment failure (TTF) was also performed.

RESULTS

Of the 134 patients enrolled in the study, 130 were evaluable: 68 subjects received palonosetron plus aprepitant and 62 received palonosetron alone. Although the primary end point of CR was similar between the treatment arms (72% vs 69%; P = .55), a higher proportion of patients treated with palonosetron plus aprepitant were free from nausea during the whole study period (43% vs 27%; P = .03). There was also a significant difference in favor of the two-drug regimens in TTF (median: 5 days vs 3 days; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests that every-other-day palonosetron plus 3-day aprepitant can add clinical benefit to the control of CINV caused by multiple-day, corticosteroid-free chemotherapy for AML. In this challenging setting of CINV, further investigations of palonosetron in combination with aprepitant administered with an expanded schedule are warranted. ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT02205164.

Palonosetron is a Better Choice Compared With Ondansetron for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) in a Resource-limited Pediatric Oncology Center: Results From a Randomized Control Trial

Palonosetron (PG) is a newer, safe, and effective long-acting 5-HT3 antagonist commonly used in adults, but data in children are limited. A randomized controlled trial was carried out among children with cancer during their first cycle of moderate or highly emetogenic chemotherapy to receive either PG or ondansetron (OG) with the aim of comparing their efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. In total, 200 children (mean age, 8 y, male:female=1.8:1) were recruited, 100 in each arm. Complete response, defined as no vomiting, in acute (<24 h), delayed (24 to 120 h), and overall phases (0 to 120 h) was observed in 88%, 88%, and 81% of cases, respectively, for PG versus 84%, 79%, and 72%, respectively, for OG (P=0.42, 0.09 and 0.21, respectively). Complete protection rates, defined as no nausea and vomiting in children above 6 years of age, in acute, delayed, and overall phases were 84%, 81%, and 73%, respectively, for PG versus 79%, 67%, and 60%, respectively, for OG (P=0.44, 0.06 and 0.10, respectively). Overall, the efficacy and safety of PG in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was comparable with OG, but PG was a more cost-effective and suitable choice for busy centers in resource-limited countries.

Fixed Combination Antiemetic: A Literature Review on Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Using Netupitant/Palonosetron

BACKGROUND

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be improved with guideline-consistent use of antiemetics. However, adherence to antiemetic guidelines remains often insufficient. Therefore, new strategies that improve adherence are needed.

OBJECTIVES

To review the latest antiemetic guideline recommendations and provide an update on the use of NEPA, a fixed combination antiemetic composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (RA) netupitant and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 RA palonosetron (Akynzeo®).

METHODS

Analysis of the literature was performed, including guidelines, published literature, congress data on NEPA, and relevant articles on CINV.

FINDINGS

Nurses are in a unique position to promote guideline-consistent antiemetic prophylaxis and are central in the education of patients and caregivers. Thus, nurses’ continuous education on antiemetic treatments is key for the prevention and management of CINV. NEPA offers a simplified antiemetic therapy with the potential to increase guideline adherence.

Preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with netupitant/palonosetron, the first fixed combination antiemetic: current and future perspective

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be prevented in most patients receiving appropriate antiemetic treatment. However, inadequate uptake of current antiemetic guideline recommendations by physicians, and poor treatment adherence by patients, lead to suboptimal CINV control. There is an unmet need to optimize guideline-consistent use of antiemetics to improve CINV management and prevention. Herein, we provide an overview of CINV, then discuss oral and intravenous NEPA, the first fixed combination antiemetic, composed of netupitant/fosnetupitant and palonosetron. We describe the main pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic characteristics of NEPA, and review the clinical evidence supporting its use in the prevention of CINV.

Natural Negative Allosteric Modulators of 5-HT₃ Receptors

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remain the most common and devastating side-effects associated with cancer chemotherapy. In recent decades, several lines of research emphasize the importance of 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3; serotonin) receptors in the pathogenesis and treatment of CINV. 5-HT₃ receptors are members of ligand-gated ion channels that mediate the rapid and transient membrane-depolarizing effect of 5-HT in the central and peripheral nervous system. These receptors play important roles in nausea and vomiting, as well as regulation of peristalsis and pain transmission. The development of antagonists for 5-HT₃ receptor dramatically improved the treatment of CINV in cancer patients. In fact, the most common use of 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists to date is the treatment of nausea and vomiting. In recent years, there has been an increasing tendency to use natural plant products as important therapeutic entities in the treatment of various diseases. In this article, we examined the results of earlier studies on the actions of natural compounds on the functional properties of 5-HT₃ receptors. It is likely that these natural modulators of 5-HT₃ receptors can be employed as lead structures for the synthesis of therapeutic agents for treating CINV in future clinical studies.

Risk factors associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the triplet antiemetic regimen including palonosetron or granisetron for cisplatin-based chemotherapy: analysis of a randomized, double-blind controlled trial

PURPOSE

The triplet antiemetic regimen is recommended for cisplatin-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy, in the current guidelines for antiemetic prophylaxis. Although risk factors related to chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) have been identified by several prior studies, there are only few studies evaluating risk factors associated with the prophylactic triplet antiemetic therapy, particularly in palonosetron use. The present study aimed to reveal the risk factors related to CINV development in patients receiving cisplatin and to compare CINV risk factors between palonosetron and granisetron use.

METHODS

In total, 825 patients in a phase III trial receiving palonosetron with graniestron were evaluated. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to predict risk factors associated with CINV development. Additionally, risk factors associated with CINV development were separately evaluated in each treatment group.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis of the entire study group revealed that sex, age, cisplatin dose, and granisetron use were significant and independent factors affecting CINV development in the overall phase. Similarly, sex and age were risk factors for CINV in both treatment groups. Kaplan-Meier curves classified by each treatment group showed no significant difference between the groups among patients without any risk factors for CINV (P = 0.353). Conversely, complete response rates for patients with at least one risk factor were higher in patients receiving palonosetron (P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis revealed the importance of previously reported CINV risk factors when using triplet antiemetics. Palonosetron might be preferred for patients with at least one risk factor.

Anti-emetic Action of the Brain-Penetrating New Ghrelin Agonist, HM01, Alone and in Combination With the 5-HT3 Antagonist, Palonosetron and With the NK1 Antagonist, Netupitant, Against Cisplatin- and Motion-Induced Emesis in Suncus murinus (House Musk Shrew)

Ghrelin has well-known activity to stimulate appetite and weight gain. Evidence suggests that ghrelin may also have effects in reducing chemotherapy-induced emesis via growth hormone secretagogue receptors (GHS-R1A) in the brain. However, it is not known whether the stimulation of GHS-R1A has broad inhibitory anti-emetic effects. In the present studies, we used Suncus murinus to investigate the potential of the new and novel orally bioavailable brain-penetrating GHS-R1A mimetic, HM01 (1-[(1S)-1-(2,3-dichloro-4-methoxyphenyl)ethyl]-3-methyl-3-[(4R)-1-Methyl-3,3-dimethyl-4-piperidyl]urea), to reduce emesis induced by a variety of emetic challenges. HM01 (1 to 30 mg/kg, p.o.) antagonized emesis induced by cisplatin (30 mg/kg, i.p.) and by motion (4 cm horizontal displacement, 1 Hz) but was ineffective against emesis induced by nicotine (5 mg/kg, s.c.) and copper sulfate (120 mg/kg by intragastric gavage). In other experiments, HM01 (3 mg/kg, p.o.) enhanced the anti-emetic control of a regimen of palonosetron (0.01 mg/kg, p.o.) alone and palonosetron (0.01 mg/kg p.o.) plus netupitant (1 mg/kg, p.o.). HM01 (10 mg/kg, p.o.) also had positive effects in increasing feeding and drinking in nicotine-treated animals, and it shortened the latency to drink in animals treated with cisplatin. These data indicate that brain-penetrating GHS-R1A agonists may have use alone and/or in combination with standard anti-emetic regimens for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and motion sickness.

Efficacy of palonosetron plus dexamethasone in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis in patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy for gynecologic cancers: a phase II study by the West Japan Gynecologic Oncology Group (WJGOG 131)

OBJECTIVE

Palonosetron is effective for the management of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). While emetogenic carboplatin-based chemotherapy is widely used to treat gynecologic cancers, few studies have evaluated the antiemetic effectiveness of palonosetron in this setting.

METHODS

A multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase II trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of palonosetron in controlling CINV in patients with gynecologic cancer. Chemotherapy-naïve patients received intravenous palonosetron (0.75 mg/body) and dexamethasone before the infusion of carboplatin-based chemotherapy on day 1. Dexamethasone was administered (orally or intravenously) on days 2-3. The incidence and severity of CINV were evaluated using the patient-completed Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Antiemesis Tool and treatment diaries. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients experiencing complete control (CC) of vomiting, with "no rescue antiemetic medication" and "no clinically significant nausea" or "only mild nausea" in the delayed phase (24-120 hours post-chemotherapy). Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients with a complete response (CR: "no vomiting" and "no rescue antiemetic medication") in the acute (0-24 hours), delayed (24-120 hours), and overall (0-120 hours) phases, and CC in the acute and overall phases.

RESULTS

Efficacy was assessable in 77 of 80 patients recruited. In the acute and delayed phases, the CR rates the primary endpoint, were 71.4% and 59.7% and the CC rates, the secondary endpoint, were 97.4% and 96.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

While palonosetron effectively controls acute CINV, additional antiemetic management is warranted in the delayed phase after carboplatin-based chemotherapy in gynecologic cancer patients (Trial registry at UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000012806).

Synthesis, Characterization and Biocompatibility of N-palmitoyl L-alanine-based Organogels as Sustained Implants of Granisetron and Evaluation of thier Antiemetic Effect

PURPOSE

To assess the gelation power of N-palmitoyl L-alanine derivatives in injectable oils and to use the best chosen organogel as parenteral implant of granisetron for the treatment of emesis.

METHODS

Twelve N-palmitoyl L-alanine derived organogels were developed and evaluated in terms of morphology, thermal properties and in vivo performance. The ability of the selected formula to form in situ gel upon subcutaneous injection in rats and its biocompatibility were monitored over 2 weeks by histopathological examination of the injection site.

RESULTS

The acid derivative (N-palmitoyl L-alanine; PA) was superior to ester derivatives. The chosen formula (PA/safflower oil 10% w/v) was successful in forming an in situ gel of granisetron when subcutaneously injected in rats, lasting for 2 weeks and proved to be biocompatible by histopathological examination. Moreover, it exerted an extended antiemetic activity by decreasing the cisplatin-induced pica for a duration of 96 h and reduced preprotachykinin A mRNA expression and Substance P level for up to 4 days (gastric tissue) or 5 days (medulla oblongata) in rats.

CONCLUSION

Granisetron organogel could be considered as a safe, sustained-release and supportive anticancer treatment in both acute and chronic emesis as well as an accompanying treatment with chemotherapeutics in cancer cases.

The C and E subunits of the serotonin 5-HT3 receptor subtly modulate electrical properties of the receptor

Serotonin type 3 (5-hydroxytrptamine-3, 5-HT₃) receptors are ligand-gated cation channels present in both central and peripheral nervous systems. In humans there are five different subunits (A, B, C, D and E) of 5-HT₃ receptors which can form homomeric or heteromeric receptors that may account for discrepancies in patient responses to treatments. The present study commences characterisation of the profiles of human 5-HT₃ receptors containing C and/or E subunits. Recombinant 5-HT₃ receptors were expressed transiently in HEK293T cells and expression was checked via immunocytochemistry staining against each epitope-tagged subunits. Functional characterisation of different combinations of 5-HT₃ receptor complexes was studied via patch clamp whole cell recordings. In this study, increased current was seen in cells containing A and C subunits but only subtle changes were seen in the electrical properties of cells expressing A, AE, or ACE subunits in response to the ligand, 5-HT. Both di- and tri-heteromeric 5-HT₃ receptors were significantly inhibited by the antagonists, ondansetron and palonosetron. Notably, palonosetron exerted stronger and more rapid inhibition on the 5-HT₃ receptor ACE tri-heteromer compared to homomeric and di-heteromeric counterparts. This study demonstrated that the C and E subunits when assembled as simple or complex heteromeric 5-HT₃ receptors may alter efficacies of 5-HT and clinically used antagonists such as ondansetron and palonosetron, and this in turn may have implications for patient responses to therapies.

Comparison between Antiemetic Effects of Palonosetron and Granisetron on Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Japanese Patients Treated with R-CHOP

In the present study, the antiemetic effect of palonosetron, not combined with dexamethasone and aprepitant, on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was evaluated in patients with malignant lymphoma receiving first-line rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy, and was compared to that of granisetron. A total of 74 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma were included in this study (April 2007 to December 2015). Palonosetron (0.75 mg) or granisetron (3 mg) was intravenously administered before R-CHOP therapy. The proportions of patients with complete response (CR) during the overall (0-120 h after the start of R-CHOP therapy), acute (0-24 h) and delayed (24-120 h) phases were evaluated. CR was defined as no vomiting and no use of antiemetic rescue medication. A total of 32 and 42 patients were treated with palonosetron and granisetron, respectively. The CR rate in the palonosetron group was significantly higher than that in the granisetron group during the delayed phase (90.6 and 61.9%, respectively; p=0.007). Logistic regression analysis showed that use of palonosetron improved the CR rate during the delayed phase, compared to use of granisetron. Female sex, age less than 60 years, no habitual alcohol intake, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) score of 1 were significant risk factors associated with non-CR. The findings of this study suggested the superiority of palonosetron to granisetron, without accompanying dexamethasone and aprepitant, for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with malignant lymphoma.

Comparison of Palonosetron, Dexamethasone, and Palonosetron Plus Dexamethasone as Prophylactic Antiemetic and Antipruritic Drug in Patients Receiving Intrathecal Morphine for Lower Segment Cesarean Section

Background:

Intrathecal morphine is commonly used for postcesarean analgesia. Its use is frequently associated with opioid-induced nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. Palonosetron (0.075 mg) combined with dexamethasone (8 mg) is postulated to have an additive effect over each drug alone. The study, therefore, compared the effect of intravenous (i.v.) palonosetron, dexamethasone, and palonosetron with dexamethasone combination in preventing intrathecal morphine-induced postoperative vomiting and pruritus in lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) patients.

Settings and Design:

Randomized, prospective, double-blinded, observational clinical study.

Methods:

Ninety pregnant women, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I undergoing LSCS were included in the study. They were randomly assigned to three groups – Group P received 0.075 mg palonosetron i.v., Group D received dexamethasone 8 mg i.v., and Group PD received palonosetron 0.075 mg along with dexamethasone 4 mg i.v., just after spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine 2.2 ml (12 mg) and 150 μg morphine. The incidence of pruritus, nausea, vomiting, and need for rescue drug were recorded for 24 h.

Statistical Analysis:

Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test for categorical variables and Chi-square test for noncategorical variables.

Results:

The incidence of nausea, vomiting was significantly more in Group D (40%) than Group P (27%) and Group PD (20%) in 24 h. The incidence of pruritus was significantly more in Group D (6%) than Group P and PD (3%). The need of rescue antiemetic was more in Group D (30%) than Group P (6%) and Group PD (3%). No difference in three groups requiring rescue antipruritic drug.

Conclusion:

Prevention of intrathecal morphine-induced vomiting and pruritus was more effective with palonosetron alone or with dexamethasone combination than dexamethasone alone. Combination of palonosetron and dexamethasone proved no better than palonosetron alone.

Creation and evaluation of a cancer chemotherapy order review guide for use at a community hospital

The proper evaluation of cancer chemotherapy orders is necessary for patients to receive safe and effective treatment. The chemotherapy treatment setting is evolving resulting in hospital pharmacists without extensive oncology training or experience now being responsible for evaluation of chemotherapy orders. The primary objective was to create a step-by-step chemotherapy order evaluation guide with a detailed explanation for each step. The secondary objective was to evaluate non-oncology trained pharmacists' ability to accurately review simulated chemotherapy orders post-education using the guide. A two-page chemotherapy order evaluation guide was created based on an accepted method of chemotherapy order review consisting of the following eight steps: regimen verification, clinical trial protocol verification, body surface area calculation, dose calculation, laboratory values, emesis prophylaxis, adjunctive or supportive care measures, and pharmacy labels. A literature search was performed for each step. A detailed explanation for each step was written as a separate component from the guide to encompass the literature search information and current guidelines in a more comprehensive manner. Non-oncology trained community hospital pharmacists were educated on use of the guide for approximately 30 min. The guide was evaluated using timed simulated chemotherapy orders pre- and post-education consisting of a general chemotherapy order and a carboplatin dosing order. Nineteen pharmacists were tested with simulated chemotherapy orders. A significant difference was detected between the pre- and post-education for both the general chemotherapy (p = 0.00032) order and carboplatin dosing order (p = 0.031).

Palonosetron compared with ondansetron in pediatric cancer patients: multicycle analysis of a randomized Phase III study

Aim: To investigate across multiple cycles the efficacy and safety of palonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC/MEC). Patients & methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 10, 20 μg/kg palonosetron or 3 × 150 μg/kg ondansetron for up to four cycles of HEC/MEC. Results: In all on-study chemotherapy cycles, complete response rates were higher in patients in the 20 μg/kg palonosetron group than the ondansetron group. Treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the palonosetron 20 μg/kg and ondansetron groups. Conclusion: Over four cycles of HEC/MEC, 20 μg/kg palonosetron was an efficacious and safe treatment for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients.

Efficacy of Palonosetron vs. Ramosetron for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

This study was designed as a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included the comparison of palonosetron and ramosetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, KoreaMed, and Google Scholar databases (PROSPERO protocol number CRD42015026009). Primary outcomes were the incidences of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) during the first 48 hrs after surgery. The total 48-hr period was further analyzed in time epochs of 0-6 hrs (early), 6-24 hrs (late), and 24-48 hrs (delayed). Subgroup analyses according to number of risk factors, sex, and type of surgery were also performed.

RESULTS

Eleven studies including 1373 patients were analyzed. There was no difference in PON or POV between the two drugs for the total 48-hr period after surgery. However, palonosetron was more effective in preventing POV during the delayed period overall [relative risk (RR), 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39 to 0.89; p=0.013], as well as after subgroup analyses for females and laparoscopies (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86; p=0.009 and RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.94; p=0.033). Subgroup analysis for spine surgery showed that ramosetron was more effective in reducing POV during the total 48-hr (RR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.46 to 7.63; p=0.004) and early periods (RR, 8.47; 95% CI, 1.57 to 45.72; p=0.013).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis discovered no definite difference in PONV prevention between the two drugs. The significant findings that were seen in different time epochs and subgroup analyses should be confirmed in future RCTs.

Antiemetic therapy for non-anthracycline and cyclophosphamide moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

Although antiemetic management in cancer therapy has improved, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting remain common and troubling adverse events. Chemotherapeutic agents are classified based on their emetogenic effects, and appropriate antiemetics are recommended according to this categorization. Chemotherapy categorized as moderately emetogenic is associated with a wide spectrum of emetic risks. Combined anthracycline and cyclophosphamide regimens have been recently reclassified as highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimen. This review focuses on antiemetic pharmacotherapy in patients receiving non-anthracycline and cyclophosphamide-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. Combination therapy with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor agonist, preferably palonosetron, and dexamethasone is the standard therapy in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, although triple therapy with add-on neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist is used as an alternative treatment strategy. Among moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, carboplatin-containing chemotherapy has considerable emetic potential, particularly during the delayed phase. However, the additional of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to the standard antiemetic therapy prevents carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. For regimens including oxaliplatin, the benefit of adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist requires further clarification.

A Phase II single-arm trial of palonosetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in malignant glioma patients receiving multidose irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab

Purpose

Given that the prognosis of recurrent malignant glioma (MG) remains poor, improving quality of life (QoL) through symptom management is important. Meta-analyses establishing antiemetic guidelines have demonstrated the superiority of palonosetron (PAL) over older 5-hydroxytryptamine 3-receptor antagonists in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention, but excluded patients with gliomas. Irinotecan plus bevacizumab is a treatment frequently used in MG, but is associated with low (55%) CINV complete response (CR; no emesis or use of rescue antiemetic) with commonly prescribed ondansetron. A single-arm Phase II trial was conducted in MG patients to determine the efficacy of intravenous PAL (0.25 mg) and dexamethasone (DEX; 10 mg) received in conjunction with biweekly irinotecan–bevacizumab treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects achieving acute CINV CR (no emesis or antiemetic ≤24 hours postchemotherapy). Secondary end points included delayed CINV CR (days 2–5), overall CINV CR (days 1–5), and QoL, fatigue, and toxicity.

Materials and methods

A two-stage design of 160 patients was planned to differentiate between CINV CR of 55% and 65% after each dose of PAL–DEX. Validated surveys assessed fatigue and QoL.

Results

A total of 63 patients were enrolled, after which enrollment was terminated due to slow accrual; 52 patients were evaluable for the primary outcome of acute CINV CR. Following PAL–DEX dose administrations 1–3, acute CINV CR rates were 62%, 68%, and 70%; delayed CINV CR rates were 62%, 66%, and 70%, and overall CINV CR rates were 47%, 57%, and 62%, respectively. Compared to baseline, there was a clinically meaningful increase in fatigue during acute and overall phases, but not in the delayed phase. There were no grade ≥3 PAL–DEX treatment-related toxicities.

Conclusion

Data suggest that PAL–DEX is effective in preventing CINV in MG patients, which ultimately maintains the QoL of patients with glioma.

Profile of Antiemetic Activity of Netupitant Alone or in Combination with Palonosetron and Dexamethasone in Ferrets and Suncus murinus (House Musk Shrew)

Background and Aims: Chemotherapy-induced acute and delayed emesis involves the activation of multiple pathways, with 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT; serotonin) playing a major role in the initial response. Substance P tachykinin NK₁ receptor antagonists can reduce emesis induced by disparate emetic challenges and therefore have a clinical utility as broad inhibitory anti-emetic drugs. In the present studies, we investigate the broad inhibitory anti-emetic profile of a relatively new NK₁ receptor antagonist, netupitant, alone or in combination with the long acting 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist, palonosetron, for a potential to reduce emesis in ferrets and shrews.

Materials and Methods: Ferrets were pretreated with netupitant and/or palonosetron, and then administered apomorphine (0.125 mg/kg, s.c.), morphine (0.5 mg/kg, s.c.), ipecacuanha (1.2 mg/kg, p.o.), copper sulfate (100 mg/kg, intragastric), or cisplatin (5–10 mg/kg, i.p.); in other studies netupitant was administered to Suncus murinus before motion (4 cm horizontal displacement, 2 Hz for 10 min).

Results: Netupitant (3 mg/kg, p.o.) abolished apomorphine-, morphine-, ipecacuanha- and copper sulfate-induced emesis. Lower doses of netupitant (0.03–0.3 mg/kg, p.o.) dose-dependently reduced cisplatin (10 mg/kg, i.p.)-induced emesis in an acute (8 h) model, and motion-induced emesis in S. murinus. In a ferret cisplatin (5 mg/kg, i.p.)-induced acute and delayed emesis model, netupitant administered once at 3 mg/kg, p.o., abolished the first 24 h response and reduced the 24–72 h response by 94.6%; the reduction was markedly superior to the effect of a three times per day administration of ondansetron (1 mg/kg, i.p.). A single administration of netupitant (1 mg/kg, p.o.) plus palonosetron (0.1 mg/kg, p.o.) combined with dexamethasone (1 mg/kg, i.p., once per day), also significantly antagonized cisplatin-induced acute and delayed emesis and was comparable with a once-daily regimen of ondansetron (1 mg/kg, p.o.) plus aprepitant (1 mg/kg, p.o.) in combination with dexamethasone (1 mg/kg, i.p.).

Conclusion: In conclusion, netupitant has potent and long lasting anti-emetic activity against a number of emetic challenges indicating broad inhibitory properties. The convenience of protection afforded by the single dosing of netupitant together with palonosetron was demonstrated and also is known to provide an advantage over other therapeutic strategies to control emesis in man.

Management of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: role of netupitant-palonosetron combination

Purpose

The purpose of this review is to summarize and discuss the recently published data (both original studies and reviews) on the oral medication NEPA, consisting of netupitant (a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist [NK1RA], 300 mg dose) and palonosetron (5-hydroxytryptamine [serotonin or 5HT] type 3 receptor antagonist [5HT₃RA], 0.5 mg dose), in the prevention of the acute and delayed nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Methods

This review was based on the very limited number of available published trials consisting of two Phase III studies and one Phase II dose-selecting trial.

Results

These studies demonstrated some therapeutic benefits of NEPA over related chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis management, as well as its beneficial safety profile. In particular, compared with single-dose 0.5 mg palonosetron, the complete response rates for all phases of CINV for the first cycle of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (with cisplatin), as well as anthracycline–cyclophosphamide-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, were significantly higher for single-dose NEPA. The high efficacy of NEPA in terms of prevention of CINV continued throughout repeated cycles of highly and moderately emetogenic therapies.

Conclusion

It is currently recommended that patients who are administered highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens should obtain a three-drug combination consisting of NK1RA, 5HT₃RA, and dexamethasone. The recently available oral combination of NEPA plus dexamethasone provides an additional pharmacological management option that could be considered in this scenario.

Thapsigargin-induced activation of Ca(2+)-CaMKII-ERK in brainstem contributes to substance P release and induction of emesis in the least shrew

Cytoplasmic calcium (Ca(2+)) mobilization has been proposed to be an important factor in the induction of emesis. The selective sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum Ca(2+)-ATPase (SERCA) inhibitor thapsigargin, is known to deplete intracellular Ca(2+) stores, which consequently evokes extracellular Ca(2+) entry through cell membrane-associated channels, accompanied by a prominent rise in cytosolic Ca(2+). A pro-drug form of thapsigargin is currently under clinical trial as a targeted cancer chemotherapeutic. We envisioned that the intracellular effects of thapsigargin could cause emesis and planned to investigate its mechanisms of emetic action. Indeed, thapsigargin did induce vomiting in the least shrew in a dose-dependent and bell-shaped manner, with maximal efficacy (100%) at 0.5 mg/kg (i.p.). Thapsigargin (0.5 mg/kg) also caused increases in c-Fos immunoreactivity in the brainstem emetic nuclei including the area postrema (AP), nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS) and dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus (DMNX), as well as enhancement of substance P (SP) immunoreactivity in DMNX. In addition, thapsigargin (0.5 mg/kg, i.p.) led to vomit-associated and time-dependent increases in phosphorylation of Ca(2+)/calmodulin kinase IIα (CaMKIIα) and extracellular signal-regulated protein kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) in the brainstem. We then explored the suppressive potential of diverse chemicals against thapsigargin-evoked emesis including antagonists of: i) neurokinin-1 receptors (netupitant), ii) the type 3 serotonin receptors (palonosetron), iii) store-operated Ca(2+) entry (YM-58483), iv) L-type Ca(2+) channels (nifedipine), and v) SER Ca(2+)-release channels inositol trisphosphate (IP3Rs) (2-APB)-, and ryanodine (RyRs) (dantrolene)-receptors. In addition, the antiemetic potential of inhibitors of CaMKII (KN93) and ERK1/2 (PD98059) were investigated. All tested antagonists/blockers attenuated emetic parameters to varying degrees except palonosetron, however a combination of non-effective doses of netupitant and palonosetron exhibited additive antiemetic efficacy. A low-dose combination of nifedipine and 2-APB plus dantrolene mixture completely abolished thapsigargin-evoked vomiting, CaMKII-ERK1/2 activation and SP elevation. In addition, pretreatment with KN93 or PD98059 suppressed thapsigargin-induced increases in SP and ERK1/2 activation. Intracerebroventricular injection of netupitant suppressed vomiting caused by thapsigargin which suggests that the principal site of evoked emesis is the brainstem. In sum, this is the first study to demonstrate that thapsigargin causes vomiting via the activation of the Ca(2+)-CaMKII-ERK1/2 cascade, which is associated with an increase in the brainstem tissue content of SP, and the evoked emesis occurs through SP-induced activation of neurokinin-1 receptors.

Evaluation of palonosetron and dexamethasone with or without aprepitant to prevent carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Although antiemetic management has improved, better control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), particularly during the delayed phase, is needed. The benefit of combination therapy using dexamethasone and the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron compared with that of other such receptor antagonists in carboplatin-based chemotherapy is unclear. The effectiveness of adding aprepitant for CINV treatment in moderate emetogenic chemotherapy is also unknown. We compared the efficacy and safety of triple antiemetic therapy using aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone with that of double antiemetic therapy using palonosetron and dexamethasone in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving carboplatin-containing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naïve patients with non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled in this prospective controlled study. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to groups receiving either double antiemetic therapy with palonosetron and dexamethasone, or triple antiemetic therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone. Complete response rate (no vomiting episode and no rescue therapy) was evaluated as the primary endpoint during the 5-day post-chemotherapy period.

RESULTS

The aprepitant add-on and double therapy groups showed overall complete response rates of 80.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 68.4-92.6%) and 76.9% (95% CI: 63.7-90.1%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.81; 95% CI; 0.27-2.36; p=0.788), respectively. Complete responses in the acute and delayed phases and overall incidences of treatment-related adverse events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

According to the selection design, triple antiemetic therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone was not considered as an option for further studies.

Palonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: an evidence-based review of safety, efficacy, and place in therapy

Introduction: The second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonist palonosetron is effective in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC, respectively). In addition, palonosetron has been the first and, at present, the only 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist to have a specific indication for the prevention of delayed CINV associated with MEC. The unique pharmacology of this antagonist is thought to partly explain its improved efficacy against delayed symptoms.

Aims: To review the evidence underlying the use of palonosetron in preventing CINV.

Evidence review: A recent meta-analysis consistently showed that palonosetron significantly increases the control of both emesis and nausea during the acute and delayed phases after single-day HEC or MEC. Consistent with these findings from trials that did not include an neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonist, randomized controlled trials recently showed that a triple combination with palonosetron achieves significantly better control of delayed CINV, particularly delayed nausea, in patients undergoing HEC or the high-risk combination of an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC). Evidence from randomized studies also supports palonosetron as a valuable option to reduce the total corticosteroid dose administered in patients undergoing multiple cycles of MEC or AC chemotherapy. Additional benefits of palonosetron include the lack of a warning on cardiac safety and no known clinically significant drug–drug interactions.

Place in therapy and conclusion: Evidence currently available indicates that palonosetron significantly adds to the clinician’s ability to effectively control CINV in patients undergoing HEC or MEC. It is recommended in the international guidelines for the prevention of CINV caused by MEC. The high safety profile and the opportunity to reduce the total corticosteroid dose with no loss in efficacy against delayed CINV should also contribute to a wider use of palonosetron in clinical practice.