Treatment of Breakthrough and Refractory Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

NEPA (Netupitant/Palonosetron) for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) in Patients Receiving Highly or Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy Who Experienced Breakthrough CINV in Cycle 1 of Chemotherapy: A Phase II Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Although control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is substantially improved with guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis, breakthrough CINV remains a significant clinical patient problem. In subsequent cycles after breakthrough occurs, antiemetic guidelines recommend adding agents not used in the initial cycle. This study was designed to evaluate the use of NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) plus dexamethasone with or without olanzapine for the prevention of CINV in the second cycle of chemotherapy for patients receiving highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) who developed breakthrough CINV in their first cycle despite guideline-directed prophylactic antiemetics.

METHODS

This was a Phase 2, single center, open-label study. Patients received guideline-recommended prophylactic antiemetics in Cycle 1 based on the chemotherapy emetogenicity. Patients who experienced breakthrough CINV in Cycle 1 received intravenous (IV) NEPA (Day 1) plus dexamethasone (Days 1-4) and olanzapine (Days 1-4) for HEC or IV NEPA (Day 1) plus dexamethasone (Days 1-4) for MEC in Cycle 2.

RESULTS

Of the 227 patients enrolled in Cycle 1, 100 patients (n = 37 HEC, 63 MEC) experienced breakthrough CINV and received the NEPA-based treatments in Cycle 2. The complete response (no emesis/no rescue use) rates [95% confidence intervals] during the overall (0-120 h) phase were 76% [59%, 88%] and 79% [67%, 89%] in the HEC and MEC groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These results show that NEPA with or without olanzapine is an effective approach for CINV prevention for patients receiving HEC or MEC who develop breakthrough CINV after their first course of chemotherapy. The results support the antiemetic guideline recommendations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT06065722.

[Update of guidelines of the AFSOS, SFRO, SFH, SFNCM, SFCE, GFRP for the management of radio-induced nausea and vomiting]

BACKGROUND

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting have mutiple clinical consequences: delay or refusal of irradiation (decreased antineoplastic efficacy of irradiation), altered quality of life, dehydration, malnutrition, interruption of treatment, decompensation of comorbidities and aspiration. These guidelines aim at defining good clinical practices for management of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV).

METHODS

AFSOS, SFRO, SFH, SFNEP, SFCE and GFRP applied an expert consensus methodology to propose updated guidelines.

RESULTS

RINV are underdiagnosed and undertreated. Assessment of the emetogenic risk depends on two main factors: 1) the irradiated anatomical localization and 2) the associated concomitant chemotherapy. In case of exclusive radiotherapy, primary antiemetic prophylaxis depends on the emetogenic risk of irradiated anatomical localization. Primary antiemetic prophylaxis is initiated at the onset of irradiation and continues until 24h after the end of the irradiation. In the case of concomitant radiochemotherapy, the emetogenic risk is generally higher for chemotherapy and the primary antiemetic prophylaxis corresponds to that of chemo-induced nausea and vomiting. In the case of persistence of these symptoms, subject to a well-conducted treatment, a rigorous diagnostic procedure must be carried out before being attributed to radiotherapy and precise evaluation of their impact. Remedial treatments are less well codified.

CONCLUSION

It is essential to know and good management practices for radiation-induced nausea and vomiting.

Integrating nutrition, physical exercise, psychosocial support and antiemetic drugs into CINV management: The road to success

Over the years, advancements in antiemetic drugs have improved chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) control. However, despite the antiemetics therapies, in a relevant number of adult patients (∼30 %), CINV is still persistent, leading to several complications, such as electrolyte imbalances, anorexia, and treatment discontinuation. Supportive care interventions have gained credibility in cancer care, helping to improve patients' psycho-physical condition, quality of life, and managing symptoms, including CINV. Physical exercise and tailored nutritional counseling have demonstrated benefits in reducing the severity of nausea and vomiting. Psychological intervention has been postulated as a key approach in controlling anticipatory nausea/vomiting, as well as acupuncture/acupressure has been shown to decrease nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy treatments. In the current review, we aim to provide a clinical update on current prophylactic and delayed antiemetic guidelines for CINV and an overview of the non-pharmacological interventions tested for alleviating CINV in patients with cancer.

Outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis among pediatric cancer patients receiving moderate to highly emetogenic chemotherapy at pediatric hemato-oncology ward of Tikur Anbessa specialized hospital: A prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major issue for chemotherapy pediatric patients, especially in developing countries due to limited access to essential antiemetics. This study aimed to assess antiemetic prophylaxis outcomes in pediatric cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

A longitudinal prospective observational study design was conducted among 201 pediatric cancer patients followed up to 120 h post-chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The majority of patients (75.1%) received combination prophylactic antiemetics in the acute phase. Complete response (CR) was the highest in the acute phase (71.1%). Emesis episodes occurred most frequently on the first day of treatment (28.4%) and gradually decreased over time. History of motion sickness, platinum-based chemotherapy, and prior chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) were associated with emesis during the acute phase whereas multiple-day chemotherapy, prior CIV, receipt of antiemetics, and a history of motion sickness in the delayed phase. However, the odds of CIV were reduced with steroid presence in the chemotherapy regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of participants could not achieve a CR. It is important for clinicians to be cognizant of risk factors that influence the outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis to achieve better control of CINV among pediatric cancer patients.

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.

2020 ASCO, 2023 NCCN, 2023 MASCC/ESMO, and 2019 CCO: a comparison of antiemetic guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common toxicity that may impair the quality of life of patients with various malignancies ranging from early to end stages. In light of frequent changes to the guidelines for optimal management of CINV, we undertook this narrative review to compare the most recent guidelines published by ASCO (2020), NCCN (2023), MASCC/ESMO (2023), and CCO (2019). The processes undertaken by each organization to evaluate existing literature were also described. Although ASCO, NCCN, MASCC/ESMO, and CCO guidelines for the treatment and prevention of CINV share many fundamental similarities, the literature surrounding low and minimal emetic risk regimens is lacking. Current data regarding adherence to these guidelines is poor and warrants further investigation to improve care.

Adherence to antiemetic guidelines in solid cancer patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Korea

BACKGROUND

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) is known to induce nausea and vomiting (CINV) in approximately 90% of cancer patients undergoing this regimen unless proper prophylactic antiemetics are administered. This study aimed to analyze the use of a three-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen during the first cycle of chemotherapy and assess the compliance rate with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilized data from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 to 2020 provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The claims data encompassed 10 to 13% of inpatients admitted at least once each year. Patients with solid cancers treated with two HEC regimens, namely anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC) and cisplatin-based regimens, were selected as the study population. We evaluated the use of a three-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone and compliance with the NCCN guidelines. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to estimate the influence of variables on guideline adherence.

RESULTS

A total of 3119 patients were included in the analysis. The overall compliance rate with the NCCN guidelines for prophylactic antiemetics was 74.3%, with higher rates observed in the AC group (87.9%) and lower rates in the cisplatin group (60.4%). The AC group had a 6.37 times higher likelihood of receiving guideline-adherent antiemetics than the cisplatin group. Further analysis revealed that, compared to 2016, the probability of complying with the guidelines in 2019 and 2020 was 0.72 times and 0.76 times lower, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that a considerable proportion of HEC-treated patients received guideline-adherent antiemetic therapies. However, given the variations in adherence rates between different chemotherapy regimens (AC vs. cisplatin), efforts to improve adherence and optimize antiemetic treatment remain essential for providing the best possible care for patients experiencing CINV.

2023 MASCC and ESMO guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

• Nausea and vomiting are considered amongst the most troublesome adverse events for patients receiving antineoplastics. • The guideline covers emetic risk classification, prevention and management of treatment-induced nausea and vomiting. • The Consensus Committee consisted of 34 multidisciplinary, health care professionals and three patient advocates. • Recommendations are based on evidence-based data (level of evidence) and the authors’ collective expert opinion (grade). • All recommendations are for the first course of antineoplastic therapy; modifications may be needed in subsequent courses.

Evaluation of acupuncture and auriculotherapy in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture and auriculotherapy protocol in relieving chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients compared to the antiemetic protocol.

METHOD

Pilot study of a pragmatic two-arm clinical trial: an acupuncture group received systemic acupuncture, auriculotherapy, and antiemetic protocol; a control group used antiemetic protocol. The sample consisted of 42 patients with cancer of the gastrointestinal system or multiple myeloma. The outcome was assessed using the Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Assessment Tool and the patient's diary.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between groups according to the assessment of the patient's diary and the Assessment Tool of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The patients were 60 years old on average and the groups were homogeneous, except for marital status. In the diary, there was no statistical difference between groups and sessions for days of nausea (p = 0.873) and vomiting episodes (p = 0.993).

CONCLUSION

The protocol of acupuncture and auriculotherapy as a complementary treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was ineffective, considering the limitations of the study.

Pinellia ternata-containing traditional Chinese medicine combined with 5-HT3RAs for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 RCTs

BACKGROUND

Pinellia ternata (P. ternata, Banxia)-containing traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in China as an adjuvant treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, evidence of its efficacy and safety remains limited.

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) in the treatment of CINV.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

All relevant RCTs were systematically retrieved from seven internet databases (up to February 10, 2023). P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs to treat CINV was included in all RCTs. The clinical effective rate (CER) was defined as the primary outcome, while appetite, quality of life (QOL), and side effects were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 22 RCTs with 1,787 patients. Our results indicated that P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs significantly improved the CER of CINV (RR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.37-1.57, p < 0.00001), appetite (RR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.42-2.20, p < 0.00001), QOL (RR = 7.67, 95% CI = 1.56-13.78, p = 0.01), the CER of several 5-HT3RA medications (RR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.37-1.57, p < 0.00001), and acute and delayed vomiting (RR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.12-1.36, p < 0.0001) compared with the 5-HT3RAs alone, while the combination therapy decreased the incidence of side effects induced by 5-HT3RAs for CINV (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.42-0.59, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis, P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs was safer and more effective than 5-HT3RAs alone for CINV patients. However, due to the limitations of the included studies, more high-quality clinical trials are required to further validate our findings.

Immune activation attenuates memory acquisition and consolidation of conditioned disgust (anticipatory nausea) in rats

Anticipatory nausea is a classically conditioned response to cues (e.g. contexts) that have been previously paired with a nauseating stimulus, such as chemotherapy in humans. In rodents, anticipatory nausea can be modeled by pairing a novel context with lithium chloride (LiCl), which leads to conditioned disgust behaviours (such as gaping) when exposed to the context alone. Growing evidence suggests that selective immune activation attenuates various forms of learning and memory. The present study investigated the effects of the endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS) on LiCl-induced anticipatory nausea across critical stages of associative memory including acquisition, consolidation, and extinction. Adult male Long Evans rats were subject to intraperitoneal (i.p.) LiCl (127 mg/kg) or vehicle control (NaCl) paired with a 30 min conditioning trial in a distinct context for a total of 4 trials. To study acquisition, rats were administered either LPS or NaCl (200 μg/kg, i.p.) 90 mins before the conditioning trials. To study consolidation, different rats were administered either LPS or NaCl (200 μg/kg, i.p.) immediately after the conditioning trials. These trials were followed by 4 drug-free extinction trials within the same context. LPS significantly reduced conditioned gaping behaviours by the 4th conditioning trial and on the 1st drug-free extinction trial when administered 90 mins before or immediately after the conditioning trials. LPS had no significant effect on extinction. The present study provides strong evidence for the attenuating effects of LPS exposure on the acquisition and consolidation of LiCl-induced anticipatory nausea.

The emerging role of olanzapine in paediatric CINV control: A review

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a serious side effect of chemotherapy that negatively impacts the quality of life of oncological patients and is associated with the emetogenic risk specific to administered chemotherapy. Current practice guidelines on the use of antiemetics in CINV include the option of adding olanzapine to antiemetic regimens in the management of adult CINV. The use of olanzapine in pediatric CINV has been restricted to children with poor CINV control. Research on the use of olanzapine in pediatric CINV has been limited. The aim of this review was to evaluate current evidence on the effective and safe antiemetic use of olanzapine in pediatric CINV of any type following chemotherapy of any emetogenicity. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL databases were searched for any literature on the use of olanzapine in pediatric CINV published from 2015 to 2022. Studies that reported on the olanzapine-containing antiemetic regimen in peadiatric CINV control specifically were included. Search restrictions were placed on research published in English. The search generated 43 records that were assessed for eligibility. Out of 10 identified eligible studies a third were RCT. Findings of this review suggest that adding olanzapine to antiemetic regimen in pediatric CINV control is a worthwhile consideration. Further research is needed to establish the efficacy and safety of antiemetic olanzapine use in pediatric CINV.

Olanzapine for the Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Review to Identify the Best Way to Administer the Drug

Common treatment methods for malignant tumors include surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, etc., among which chemotherapy plays an important role. However, chemotherapy brings corresponding side effects while killing tumor cells, and nausea and vomiting are the most common adverse reactions induced by chemotherapy. It not only affects the patient's appetite, resulting in malnutrition and electrolyte disturbances, but also reduces the patient's compliance with treatment, which further aggravates the disease. Thus, it is important to quickly prevent and cure nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy (CINV). In addition, with the continuous development of medicine, more and more antiemetic drugs have been developed. At present, the most common antiemetic agents for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are NK-1R antagonists, 5-HT3R antagonists, and dexamethasone. Surprisingly, olanzapine, often used as a psychotropic drug, has been found to be an effective antiemetic and is similar to other regimens on the safety of medicine. However, although there are numerous studies on the antiemetic effects of olanzapine, its comprehensive application remains unclear. Therefore, this review will elaborate the antiemetic effect of olanzapine in terms of the antiemetic mechanism and the safety, economic cost, dose, administration time, and drug delivery aspects.

Infection, Learning, and Memory: Focus on Immune Activation and Aversive Conditioning

Here we review the effects of immune activation primarily via lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a cell wall component of Gram-negative bacteria, on hippocampal and non-hippocampal-dependent learning and memory. Rodent studies have found that LPS alters both the acquisition and consolidation of aversive learning and memory, such as those evoking evolutionarily adaptive responses like fear and disgust. The inhibitory effects of LPS on the acquisition and consolidation of contextual fear memory are discussed. LPS-induced alterations in the acquisition of taste and place-related conditioned disgust memory within bottle preference tasks and taste reactivity tests (taste-related), in addition to conditioned context avoidance tasks and the anticipatory nausea paradigm (place-related), are highlighted. Further, conditioned disgust memory consolidation may also be influenced by LPS-induced effects. Growing evidence suggests a central role of immune activation, especially pro-inflammatory cytokine activity, in eliciting the effects described here. Understanding how infection-induced immune activation alters learning and memory is increasingly important as bacterial and viral infections are found to present a risk of learning and memory impairment.

SEOM clinical guideline emesis (2021)

Among the side effects of anticancer treatment, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most feared given its high prevalence, affecting up to 40% of patients. It can impair patient’s quality of life and provoke low adherence to cancer treatment or chemotherapy dose reductions that can comprise treatment efficacy. Suffering CINV depends on factors related to the intrinsic emetogenicity of antineoplastic drugs and on patient characteristics. CINV can appear at different times regarding the administration of antitumor treatment and the variability of risk according to the different antitumor regimens has, as a consequence, the need for a different and adapted antiemetic treatment prophylaxis to achieve the desired objective of complete protection of the patient in the acute phase, in the late phase and in the global phase of emesis. As a basis for the recommendations, the level of emetogenicity of anticancer treatment is considered and they are classified as high, moderate, low and minimal emetogenicity and these recommendations are based on the use of antiemetic drugs with a high therapeutic index: anti 5-HT, anti-NK and steroids. Despite having highly effective treatments, clinical reality shows that they are not applied enough, so evidence-based recommendations are needed to show the best options and help in decision-making. To cover all the antiemetic prophylaxis options, we have also included recommendations for oral treatments, multiday regimens and radiation-induced emesis prevention.

The Emesis Trial: Depressive Glioma Patients Are More Affected by Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

PURPOSE

Glioma patients face a limited life expectancy and at the same time, they suffer from afflicting symptoms and undesired effects of tumor treatment. Apart from bone marrow suppression, standard chemotherapy with temozolomide causes nausea, emesis and loss of appetite. In this pilot study, we investigated how chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) affects the patients' levels of depression and their quality of life.

METHODS

In this prospective observational multicentre study (n = 87), nausea, emesis and loss of appetite were evaluated with an expanded MASCC questionnaire, covering 10 days during the first and the second cycle of chemotherapy. Quality of life was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BN 20 questionnaire and levels of depression with the PHQ-9 inventory before and after the first and second cycle of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

CINV affected a minor part of patients. If present, it reached its maximum at day 3 and decreased to baseline level not before day 8. Levels of depression increased significantly after the first cycle of chemotherapy, but decreased during the further course of treatment. Patients with higher levels of depression were more severely affected by CINV and showed a lower quality of life through all time-points.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that symptoms of depression should be perceived in advance and treated in order to avoid more severe side effects of tumor treatment. Additionally, in affected patients, delayed nausea was most prominent, pointing toward an activation of the NK₁ receptor. We conclude that long acting antiemetics are necessary totreat temozolomide-induced nausea.

The Antiemetic Mechanisms of Gingerols against Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common and painful side effect that occurs in cancer patients receiving chemotherapeutic drugs. Although an abundance of agents are applied to prevent CINV, there is still lack of effective control in delayed nausea and vomiting. Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.), a traditional antiemetic herb, draws attention due to its therapeutic effect in treating acute and delayed CINV. Its main bioactive pungent constituents, gingerols, contribute to the antiemetic effect against CINV primarily. A growing number of reports have made progress in investigating the mechanisms of gingerols and their single ingredients against CINV. In this review, we searched for relevant studies in PubMed database to summarize the mechanism of gingerols in the prevention of CINV and provided a preliminary prediction on the potential targets and signaling pathways using network pharmacology, laying a foundation for further researches.

Research Progress on the Antiemetic Effect of Traditional Chinese Medicine Against Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Review

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), a common side effect in antineoplastic treatment, dramatically decreases the quality of life as well as the compliance of cancer patients. Although numerous antiemetic agents have been used for CINV treatment, its adverse reactions as well as its inadequate control toward delayed emesis still limit its clinical usage. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), with more than 3,000 years of practical history in Asia, has been successfully applied to mitigate chemotherapy-induced side effects. Growing attention is drawn to the antiemetic effect of TCM against CINV due to its promising therapeutic property and higher safety recently. In this review, we summarize the classic antiemetic TCM-based treatment and its mechanisms, so as to provide a theoretical basis for further investigations of TCM against CINV in the future.

Netupitant-palonosetron (NEPA) for Preventing Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting: From Clinical Trials to Daily Practice

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event associated with many anticancer therapies and can negatively impact patients' quality of life and potentially limit the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Currently, CINV can be prevented in most patients with guideline-recommended antiemetic regimens. However, clinicians do not always follow guidelines, and patients often face difficulties adhering to their prescribed treatments. Therefore, approaches to increase guideline adherence need to be implemented. NEPA is the first and only fixed combination antiemetic, composed of netupitant (oral)/fosnetupitant (intravenous) and palonosetron, which, together with dexamethasone, constitute a triple antiemetic combination recommended for the prevention of CINV for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy and for certain patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Thus, NEPA offers a convenient and straightforward antiemetic treatment that could improve adherence to guidelines. This review provides an overview of CINV, evaluates the accumulated evidence of NEPA's antiemetic activity and safety from clinical trials and real-world practice, and examines the preliminary evidence of antiemetic control with NEPA in daily clinical settings beyond those described in pivotal trials. Moreover, we review the utility of NEPA in controlling nausea and preserving patients' quality of life during chemotherapy, two major concerns in managing patients with cancer.

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BACKGROUND

Granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).

CONCLUSION

The use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.

An Update in Our Understanding of the Relationships Between Gene Polymorphisms and Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

The occurrence and severity of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are influenced by many factors; this includes therapeutic factors, such as the dose, administration mode, and chemotherapeutic agent emetogenicity, as well as patient-related risk factors, such as the gender, age, alcohol consumption history, and anxiety level. However, these factors cannot fully explain the individual CINV differences. In recent years, the correlation between gene polymorphism and CINV has been a hot research topic; the present paper reviews current research on CINV-related gene polymorphisms, and the results indicate that the use of gene polymorphism for the optimization of CINV efficacy is of important clinical significance.

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BACKGROUND

Granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).

CONCLUSION

The use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.

The efficacy of aprepitant in salvage treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy for patients with gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of aprepitant and its effect on the quality of life when added to standard antiemetic therapy as salvage therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is an open-label, noncomparative prospective phase II clinical trial. A total of 224 patients receiving initial moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) were enrolled. Patients received standard antiemetic treatment (5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT₃) antagonists + dexamethasone) in the first cycle. Patients failing to achieve a complete response (CR) during cycle 1 entered cycle 2 with the addition of aprepitant as salvage treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 224 patients eligible for cycle 1, 159 (71.0%, 95% CI 65.0-77.0) had a CR, and 65 patients with a noncomplete response (NCR) proceeded to cycle 2 to receive aprepitant-based salvage therapy. Then, 49 (75.4%, 95% CI 64.6-84.1) of these patients achieved a CR. The Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire showed that NCR patients in cycle 1 had an improved quality of life after receiving aprepitant-based salvage therapy in cycle 2 (cycle 1 and 2: 80.3 vs 114.0, P < 0.001). Failing to achieve a CR had a significant impact on the quality of life in both cycle 1 (FLIE score of NCR and CR patients: 80.3 vs 119.7, P < 0.001) and cycle 2 (FLIE score of NCR and CR patients: 88.3 vs 122.4, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of aprepitant as salvage therapy for patients with gastrointestinal cancer is effective and has a positive effect on quality of life.

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Pathogenesis, Recommendations, and New Trends

The significant physical and emotional effects of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are experienced by cancer patients. Severe symptoms decrease the patient's quality of life and potentially deters further treatment. The five main forms of CINV (i.e., acute, delayed, anticipatory, breakthrough, and refractory) require different treatment regimens, which often include 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids. Despite a significant amount of research and development of antiemetic agents, management of CINV remains a great challenge with many needs waiting to be adequately addressed, such as controlling non-acute CINV, developing appropriate CINV treatment protocols for multiple-day chemotherapy patients, and providing options for those prone to CINV despite treatment. Further research is required to optimize CINV management for these patients.

The Benefits of Olanzapine in Palliating Symptoms

OPINION STATEMENT

Olanzapine has become a major drug in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting as a prophylactic agent. In addition, a recent randomized trial has demonstrated its benefits in treating nausea and vomiting associated with advanced cancer. The added benefit to olanzapine is that it also stimulates appetite. As a result, since it treats multiple symptoms associated with advanced cancer, it is likely to become the antiemetic of choice in palliative care at least in the USA. The added benefit of treating insomnia and the avoidance of benzodiazepines should place olanzapine in at the top of the list of drugs to use for patients who do complain of insomnia. There is no good evidence that it potentiates the respiratory depression of opioids unlike benzodiazepines. The evidence is weak that olanzapine in as an adjuvant analgesic. Hopefully, future trials will explore this in greater depth. The benefits of adding olanzapine to potent opioids are that it may reduce craving, drug cues, and opioid misuse. Other symptoms like anxiety and depression may be addressed by the addition of olanzapine to standard antidepressants.

Efficacy of Antiemetic Regimens for Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients of Breast Cancer Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Background: Chemotherapy is fraught with serious and troublesome adverse effects, of which nausea and vomiting appears earliest and is the most disturbing. Therefore, this study was planned to investigate the antiemetic drug regimens used for chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting (CINV) in patients with breast cancer receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Subjects and Methods: An observational follow-up study was conducted to assess the efficacy of antiemetic regimens in breast cancer patients receiving HEC. A total of 71 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer were included in the study. Patients were assessed for nausea by the visual analog scale, and a history of emetic episodes and need for rescue medication were recorded at 0 h, 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 120 h post-chemotherapy till three cycles. Results: The patients were prescribed a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone (n = 23, n = 17, and n = 13 in first, second, and third cycle, respectively) or a combination of aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone (n = 48, n = 54 and n = 56 in the first, second, and third cycle, respectively). The intensity of nausea was higher for the patients who were prescribed ondansetron and dexamethasone regimen as compared to patients prescribed aprepitant additionally. Complete response, i.e., no emesis and no rescue medication, was higher in triple-drug regimen (52% vs. 0.4%, 63% vs. 17.6%, and 69% vs. 23% in three cycles, respectively). Conclusion: The control of CINV was better with a combination of aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone as compared to a regimen without aprepitant.

The why and how of maintaining hydration during cancer therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the role hydration plays in the oncology population while providing a synopsis of recent scientifically relevant published practice advancements.

RECENT FINDINGS

Dehydration causes substantial symptom burden in cancer patients, secondary to both disease process and treatment complications. Maintaining fluid and electrolytes balance is the key to hydration therapy. When oral intake is diminished, artificial hydration can be delivered via enteral, intravenous and subcutaneous routes. Use of artificial hydration in end-of-life care for cancer patients remains a highly debated topic with unclear benefits and lack of established standards. A holistic approach is required in the decision-making process.

SUMMARY

Maintaining adequate hydration is important in patients receiving cancer therapy. Challenges exist, secondary to limited clinical guidelines of hydration in patients with advanced cancer. Artificial hydration may be indicated for selected patients at the end of life if used on an individualized basis as medical treatment.

Unscheduled hydrations: redefining complete response in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting studies

Breakthrough chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is nausea and/or vomiting occurring within 5 days of chemotherapy administration despite using guideline-directed prophylactic antiemetic agents. It is highly prevalent (30–40%), usually requiring immediate treatment or “rescue” medication. If breakthrough CINV occurs, antiemetic guidelines recommend using an antiemetic agent from a different class not used in prophylaxis, along with intravenous hydration and/or dexamethasone. Data supporting these guideline recommendations are limited. Importantly, costs associated with breakthrough CINV can be substantial (i.e., unscheduled hydrations). Two retrospective analyses evaluating guideline-adherent CINV prophylaxis suggest that the initial antiemetic selection may decrease breakthrough CINV. Here we review optimal CINV prophylactic strategies and introduce unscheduled hydration as a potential important surrogate for breakthrough CINV aligning with cost-effective cancer care.

Pyridoxine for prevention and treatment of PARP inhibitor induced nausea and vomiting

Poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are a promising new treatment option for patients with ovarian cancer and are moderately emetogenic. Tolerance of therapy is paramount, and uncontrolled nausea and vomiting may limit use. Although most patients will experience improvement in nausea and vomiting after one to two months, approximately one in twenty patients will discontinue therapy due to unrelieved symptom burden. Three cases of olaparib-related nausea and vomiting mitigated by primary pyridoxine use are reported. Case 1 demonstrates successful use of pyridoxine in breakthrough nausea. Case 2 details the use of pyridoxine following refractory nausea and vomiting requiring hospitalization. Case 3 describes a prophylactic approach for a patient with significant anticipatory nausea. All three patients tolerated olaparib after starting and continuing pyridoxine. Vitamin B6, or pyridoxine, was successful as both a therapeutic and prophylactic option for significant treatment-related nausea and vomiting with PARPi use.

Modern pediatric formulations of the soft candies in the form of a jelly: determination of metoclopramide content and dissolution

In pediatrics, it is crucial to ameliorate the unpleasant taste of oral pharmaceutical formulations in order to facilitate patient compliance. Scientists' attempt to develop modern products for children is included among the new trends in pharmaceutical technology. Designing the preparation procedures and selecting the age-appropriate dosage form should be based on a benefit-risk approach, taking into account safety, efficacy, ease of use and accessibility to the patient. Part of this process should examine the necessity for taste masking, considering organoleptic and physicochemical properties of the active pharmaceutical ingredient. This research describes the incorporation of metoclopramide hydrochloride in the form of a soft candy (jelly) containing pomegranate juice. The low cost excipients and the ease of preparation are such characteristics that qualify the proposed technique as one of the alternative methods for modern drug formulations. At the same time, metoclopramide is quantitatively determined by developing a reverse phase HPLC method. The method is accurate (%RSD = 2.63, %mean recovery = 100.75) and can be used for routine analysis. The stability of metoclopramide was satisfactory after 6 months of storage (recovery 103.43%). Dissolution of the drug exceeded 92%. The proposed formulation enclosing metoclopramide in a jelly is modern, palatable and can be administered to children.

Olanzapine versus aprepitant for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen: A prospective, nonrandomized, open-label study

OBJECTIVE:

Despite the guideline-directed therapy, complete absence of nausea was noted only in 33% of breast cancer patients on anthracycline-cyclophosphamide regimen. Hence, we sought to compare the efficacy of aprepitant (APT) versus olanzapine (OLP) in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in breast cancer patients on doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

A prospective, open-label, nonrandomized study was conducted at the Department of Oncology. Eighty-three patients completed the study with 43 in the APT group and 40 in OLP group. Data about nausea and vomiting were collected using Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Antiemesis Tool (MAT). The severity of nausea and vomiting was assessed by the MAT and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03, respectively.

RESULTS:

Complete response (no emesis and no rescue medication) was achieved in 81% of the patients in APT group and 85% in the OLP group in the acute period (P = 0.661); 74% of patients in APT group and 85% in OLP group had no nausea during the same period (P = 0.233). Among the OLP patients who had nausea, 67% had moderately severe and 33% had Severe grade, and in the APT group, severity was equally distributed in mild, moderate, and severe grades. Among the patients who had vomiting, severe (CTCAE) vomiting was noticed in 81% of patients who were treated with APT compared to 50% in OLP group.

CONCLUSION:

OLP was found to be an equally effective alternative to APT in the antiemetic prophylaxis of CINV in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen.

Bioequivalence of HTX-019 (aprepitant IV) and fosaprepitant in healthy subjects: a Phase I, open-label, randomized, two-way crossover evaluation

Introduction

Fosaprepitant, an intravenous (IV) aprepitant prodrug for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, is associated with systemic and infusion-site reactions attributed in part to its surfactant, polysorbate 80. HTX-019 is an IV aprepitant formulation free of polysorbate 80 and other synthetic surfactants.

Materials and methods

This open-label, single-dose, randomized, two-way crossover bioequivalence study compared pharmacokinetics and safety of HTX-019 and fosaprepitant. Healthy subjects received single-dose HTX-019 (130 mg) or fosaprepitant (150 mg) IV over 30 min, with ≥7-day washout between doses. Blood samples were evaluated for pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence; safety evaluation included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious adverse events. Ninety-seven of one hundred enrolled subjects completed the study.

Results

Baseline characteristics were comparable between treatment sequences. For HTX-019, mean (percent coefficient of variation) area under the curve (AUC) from time 0 to time of last measurable plasma concentration (AUC_0−t), AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC_0−inf), and plasma concentration at 12 h (C_{12 h}) for HTX-019 were 43,729 h*ng/mL (32.7), 45,460 h*ng/mL (36.8), and 988.4 ng/mL (27.5), respectively; corresponding fosaprepitant values were 44,130 h*ng/mL (32.0), 46,163 h*ng/mL (36.6), and 1,022 ng/mL (28.5). Also, 90% CIs (94.186–101.354) were within bioequivalence bounds (80%–125%). Within 1 h following infusion start, one (1%) HTX-019 recipient reported one TEAE, while 20 (20%) fosaprepitant recipients reported 32 TEAEs. Dyspnea occurred in three fosaprepitant recipients (at <1 min in two subjects and at 18 min in one subject, considered study drug related) and one HTX-019 recipient (at 120 h, associated with a respiratory tract infection and considered not related to the study drug). No severe TEAEs, serious adverse events, or deaths occurred; all TEAEs resolved.

Conclusion

HTX-019 was bioequivalent to fosaprepitant and may provide a safer alternative to fosaprepitant for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis.

Recommendations for the use of oral treprostinil in clinical practice: a Delphi consensus project pulmonary circulation

Oral treprostinil was recently labeled for treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension. Similar to the period immediately after parenteral treprostinil was approved, there is a significant knowledge gap for practicing physicians who might prescribe oral treprostinil. Despite its oral route of delivery, use of the drug is challenging because of the requirement for careful titration and management of drug-related adverse effects. We aimed to create a consensus document combining available evidence with expert opinion to provide guidance for use of oral treprostinil. Following a methodology commonly used in business and social sciences (the 'Delphi Process'), two investigators from the oral treprostinil (Freedom) studies created a series of statements based on available evidence and the package insert. The set of 'best practice' statements was circulated to nine other Freedom trial investigators. Their comments were incorporated into the document as new line items for further vote and comment. The subsequent document was put to vote line by line (scale of -5 to +5) and a final statement was drafted. Consensus recommendations include initial therapy with 0.125 mg for treatment naÿ patients, three times daily dosing, aggressive use of antidiarrheal medication, and a strong preference for use of the drug in combination with other approved PAH therapies. This process was particularly valuable in providing guidance for the management of adverse events (where essentially no data is available). The Delphi process was useful to codify investigator experience and subsequently develop investigator consensus about practical issues for physicians who may wish to prescribe oral treprostinil.

Concise review of the management of iatrogenic emesis using cannabinoids: emphasis on nabilone for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a prevalent, distressing, and burdensome side effect of cancer chemotherapy. It is estimated to affect the majority of patients receiving certain anti-cancer drug regimens and can be treatment-limiting, even for life-saving medications. Despite seemingly numerous options, such as antimuscarinic anticholinergics, antihistamines, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor antagonists, and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, preventative therapies are often inadequately effective, particularly for "delayed CINV"-leaving an important unmet clinical need. Cannabinoid receptor agonists, by virtue of their unique mechanism of action and efficacy and safety data reported in clinical trials, appear to offer a useful additional option. The mechanistic value of cannabinoids has been well known for many years, but these agents may have been underutilized in the past because of the notoriety and legal status of marijuana. While botanical marijuana contains nearly 500 components, including the psychoactive tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), nabilone is an established, single-entity synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist that has become the focus of renewed interest. We review the basic pharmacology and clinical trial data of nabilone for use in prophylaxis and treatment of CINV.

Detection of Nausea-Like Response in Rats by Monitoring Facial Expression

Patients receiving cancer chemotherapy experience nausea and vomiting. They are not life-threatening symptoms, but their insufficient control reduces the patients’ quality of life. To identify methods for the management of nausea and vomiting in preclinical studies, the objective evaluation of these symptoms in laboratory animals is required. Unlike vomiting, nausea is defined as a subjective feeling described as recognition of the need to vomit; thus, determination of the severity of nausea in laboratory animals is considered to be difficult. However, since we observed that rats grimace after the administration of cisplatin, we hypothesized that changes in facial expression can be used as a method to detect nausea. In this study, we monitored the changes in the facial expression of rats after the administration of cisplatin and investigated the effect of anti-emetic drugs on the prevention of cisplatin-induced changes in facial expression. Rats were housed in individual cages with free access to food and tap water, and their facial expressions were continuously recorded by infrared video camera. On the day of the experiment, rats received cisplatin (0, 3, and 6 mg/kg, i.p.) with or without a daily injection of a 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist (granisetron: 0.1 mg/kg, i.p.) or a neurokinin NK₁ receptor antagonist (fosaprepitant: 2 mg/kg, i.p.), and their eye-opening index (the ratio between longitudinal and axial lengths of the eye) in the recorded video image was calculated. Cisplatin significantly and dose-dependently induced a decrease of the eye-opening index 6 h after the cisplatin injection, and the decrease continued for 2 days. The acute phase (day 1), but not the delayed phase (day 2), of the decreased eye-opening index was inhibited by treatment with granisetron; however, fosaprepitant abolished both phases of changes. The time-course of changes in facial expression are similar to clinical evidence of cisplatin-induced nausea in humans. These findings indicate that the monitoring of facial expression has the potential to be useful for the detection of a nausea-like response in laboratory animals.

State of the Art Antiemetic Therapy for Cancer Patients

Nausea and vomiting are common in cancer patients. The most common cause of nausea and vomiting is the administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Apart from chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), biological agents may also cause these symptoms. In this review, discussion will be focused on management of nausea and vomiting due to antineoplastic therapies. The cornerstone of effective management of nausea and vomiting secondary to these antineoplastic drugs is the prevention with the use of appropriate guideline-directed combination antiemetic regimen. Type 3 serotonin receptor antagonists (5HT3RAs), neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs), and dexamethasone are the backbone antiemetic drugs. In recent years, newer drugs and preparations have been introduced for clinical use and include second-generation 5HT3RA, palonosetron; granisetron transdermal patch; the recently introduced NK1RA rolapitant; and the novel oral combined drug NEPA (netupitant plus palonosetron); and last but not least, the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine.