Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) and dexamethasone for prevention of emesis in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide: a multi-cycle, phase II study.

BACKGROUND: NEPA is an oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant, a new highly selective neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and palonosetron. This study was conducted to evaluate whether the efficacy of NEPA against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cycle 1 would be maintained over subsequent chemotherapy cycles in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC). The study also describes the relationship between efficacy on day 1 through 5 (overall period) and control of CINV on day 6 through 21 (very late period) in each cycle. METHODS: In this multicentre, phase II study, patients received both NEPA and dexamethasone (12 mg intravenously) just before chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medication use) in cycle 1. Sustained efficacy was evaluated during the subsequent cycles by calculating the rate of CR in cycles 2-4 and by assessing the probability of sustained CR over multiple cycles. The impact of both overall CR and risk factors for CINV on the control of very late events (vomiting and moderate-to-severe nausea) were also examined. RESULTS: Of the 149 patients enrolled in the study, 139 were evaluable for a total of 552 cycles; 97.8% completed all 4 cycles. The proportion of patients with an overall CR was 70.5% (90% CI, 64.1 to 76.9) in cycle 1, and this was maintained in subsequent cycles. The cumulative percentage of patients with a sustained CR over 4 cycles was 53%. NEPA was well tolerated across cycles. In each cycle, patients with CR experienced a significantly better control of very late CINV events than those who experienced no CR. Among the patients with CR, the only predictor for increased likelihood of developing very late CINV was pre-chemotherapy (anticipatory) nausea (adjusted odds ratio = 0.65-0.50 for no CINV events on cycles 3 and 4). CONCLUSION: The high anti-emetic efficacy seen with the NEPA regimen in the first cycle was maintained over multiple cycles of adjuvant AC for breast cancer. Preliminary evidence also suggests that patients achieving a CR during the overall period gain high protection even against very late CINV events in each chemotherapy cycle. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was retrospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov identifier (NCT03862144) on 05/Mar/2019.

Randomised phase 3 open-label trial of first-line treatment with gemcitabine in association with docetaxel or paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer: a comparison of different schedules and treatments.

BACKGROUND: This open-label study compared docetaxel/gemcitabine vs. paclitaxel/gemcitabine and a weekly (W) vs. 3-weekly (3 W) schedule in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Patients relapsed after adjuvant/neoadjuvant anthracycline-containing chemotherapy were randomized to: A) gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 Day 1,8 + docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Day 1 q3W; B) gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 Day 1,8 + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 Day 1 q3W; C) gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 Day 1,8,15 + docetaxel 30 mg/m2 Day 1,8,15 q4W; D) gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 Day 1,15 + paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 Day 1,8,15 q4W. Primary endpoint was time-to-progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Interim analysis led to accrual interruption (241 patients enrolled of 360 planned). Median TTP (months) was 8.33 (95% CI: 6.19-10.16) with W and 7.51 (95% CI: 5.93-8.33) with 3 W (p=0.319). No differences were observed in median TTP between docetaxel and paclitaxel, with 85.6% and 87.0% of patients progressing, respectively. OS did not differ between regimens/schedules. ORR was comparable between regimens (HR: 0.882; 95% CI: 0.523-1.488; p=0.639), while it was significantly higher in W than in the 3 W (HR: 0.504; 95% CI: 0.299-0.850; p=0.010) schedule. Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 69.2% and 71.9% of patients on docetaxel and paclitaxel, and in 65.8% and 75.2% in W and 3 W. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment regimens showed similar TTP. W might be associated with a better tumour response compared with 3 W. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov ID NCT00236899.

Impact of five prophylactic filgrastim schedules on hematologic toxicity in early breast cancer patients treated with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the comparative efficacy of varying intensity schedules of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF; filgrastim) support in preventing febrile neutropenia in early breast cancer patients treated with relatively high-dose epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From October 1991 to April 1994, 506 stage I and II breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive, in a factorial 2 x 2 design, epirubicin 120 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 21 days for 4 cycles +/- lonidamine +/- G-CSF. The following five consecutive G-CSF schedules were tested every 100 randomly assigned patients: (1) 480 microg/d subcutaneously days 8 to 14; (2) 480 microg/d days 8, 10, 12, and 14; (3) 300 microg/d days 8 to 14; (4) 300 microg/d days 8, 10, 12, and 14; and (5) 300 microg/d days 8 and 12. RESULTS: All of the G-CSF schedules covered the neutrophil nadir time. Schedule 5 was equivalent to the daily schedules (schedules 1 and 3) and to the alternate day schedules (schedules 2 and 4) with respect to incidence of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (P = .79 and P = .89, respectively), rate of fever episodes (P = .84 and P = .77, respectively), incidence of neutropenic fever (P = .74 and P = .56, respectively), need of antibiotics (P = .77 and P = .88, respectively), and percentage of delayed cycles (P = .43 and P = .42, respectively). G-CSF had no significant impact on the delivered dose-intensity compared with the non-G-CSF arms. CONCLUSION: In the adjuvant setting, the frequency of prophylactic G-CSF administration during EC could be curtailed to only two administrations (days 8 and 12) without altering outcome. This nonrandomized trial design provides support for evaluating alternative, less intense G-CSF schedules for women with early breast cancer.

An update on palonosetron hydrochloride for the treatment of radio/chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

INTRODUCTION: Nausea and vomiting are well recognized in different clinical situations, suggesting that no single mechanism is likely to be responsible for their production. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can have a negative impact on quality of life and this may lead to a refusal of curative therapy or to a decline in palliative benefits offered by cytotoxic treatment. Palonosetron is a new agent in the class of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs), and differs from the other agents by its higher receptor-binding affinity and longer half-life. These pharmacological properties have resulted in improved antiemetic activity in clinical trials, particularly in the treatment of delayed CINV following moderate emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). AREA COVERED: A systematic review of the medical literature was completed to inform this update. MEDLINE, the Cochrane Collaboration Library and meeting materials from ASCO and MASCC were all searched. EXPERT OPINION: Palonosetron was the only serotonin receptor antagonist approved for prevention of delayed CINV caused by MEC and its use was incorporated in guideline recommendations. To date, several treatment settings such as multiple day chemotherapy require further studies to improve emesis related to therapy.

Clinical evaluation of the use of exemestane as further hormonal therapy after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal metastatic breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aromatase inhibitors Anastrozole, Letrozole (type 2 nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors: n-SAI) and Exemestane (type 1 steroidal aromatase inactivator) are used respectively as first- and second-line hormonal therapy in postmenopausal metastatic breast cancer women. Few clinical data are published on the sequential use of different classes of aromatase inhibitors. METHODS: We report an analysis on 30 postmenopausal metastatic breast cancer women treated between January 2000 and May 2002 in 2 Italian Oncology Institutions with the hormonal sequence n-SAI (Anastrozole, Letrozole) --> Exemestane. RESULTS: When receiving n-SAI (Anastrozole 8 patients and Letrozole 22 patients), 1 out of 30 women achieved a partial response, 20 of 30 patients no change (NC) > or =6 months. The analysis of the entire population treated with Exemestane showed an overall clinical benefit (CB) of 46.6 percent (14/30) with a median duration of 12 months (95%CI 6-25) and a median time to progression (TTP) of 4 months (95%CI 1-25). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm a partial lack of cross-resistance between n-SAI --> Exemestane given in sequence.

Zoledronic-acid-induced circulating level modifications of angiogenic factors, metalloproteinases and proinflammatory cytokines in metastatic breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the modifications of circulating angiogenic factors, metalloproteinases and acute-phase cytokines after the first single zoledronic acid (ZA) intravenous infusion. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eighteen consecutive breast cancer patients with bone metastases were evaluated for circulating levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), metalloproteinase 1 (MMP-1), metalloproteinase 2 (MMP-2), interleukins 1beta, 6 and 8 (IL-1beta, IL-6, IL-8), interferon gamma, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) and transforming growth factor beta1 just before and 2 and 7 days after ZA infusion. RESULTS: The MMP-2 basal value showed a statistically significant decrease 48 h after ZA (p = 0.01), being at 7 days higher than the day 2 value (p = 0.03). The VEGF basal value showed a statistically significant decrease 48 h after ZA infusion (p = 0.03), increasing above the basal level at 7 days (p = 0.07). The bFGF basal level almost significantly decreased 2 days after infusion (p = 0.06), being at 7 days higher than the basal value (p = 0.09). Comparing the day 2 values with basal ones, the linear regression model showed a significant positive correlation between IL-8 and bFGF (p = 0.02), IL-8 and TNF-alpha (p < 0.0001), bFGF and TNF-alpha (p = 0.01), MMP-1 and TNF-alpha (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: ZA could exert an antiangiogenic activity and inhibition of tumor cell bone invasiveness by a transient reduction of VEGF, bFGF and MMP-2 circulating levels after infusion.