Efficacy and safety of dexamethasone sparing for the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antiemesis 2023 from Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), is more effective than first-generation 5-HT3RA. Several studies have investigated whether dexamethasone (DEX), when combined with palonosetron as a 5-HT3RA, can be spared in the delayed phase after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). In this systematic review, we aimed to determine which between 1- and 3-day DEX administration, when combined with palonosetron, is more useful in patients receiving MEC. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for relevant studies published between 1990 and 2020. We included studies that compared the efficacy of 1- and 3-day DEX administration in preventing nausea and vomiting associated with MEC. Outcomes were "prevention of vomiting (complete response rate and no vomiting rate)," "prevention of nausea" (complete control rate, total control rate, no nausea rate, and no clinically significant nausea rate)" in the delayed phase, "prevention of blood glucose level elevation," and "prevention of osteoporosis." RESULTS: Eight studies were included in this systematic review. The no vomiting rate was significantly higher in the 3-day DEX group than in the 1-day DEX group. However, the other efficacy items did not significantly differ between the two groups. Meanwhile, insufficient evidence was obtained for "prevention of blood glucose level elevation" and "prevention of osteoporosis." CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in most antiemetic effects were found between 1- and 3-day DEX administration. Thus, DEX administration could be shortened from 3 days to 1 day when used in combination with palonosetron.

Efficacy and safety of dexamethasone sparing for the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic risk antineoplastic agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antiemesis 2023 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common side effects, classified according to timing and severity. Conventional agents such as dexamethasone are effective but have various side effects. For moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic therapies have been developed to minimize these side effects. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic therapy for highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). METHODS: We performed a thorough literature search for studies related to dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic therapy with neurokinin-1 antagonists (NK1RA) for HEC using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases. A qualitative analysis of the combined data was performed and risk differences with confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Two reviewers independently assessed the 425 records and 12 full-text articles were evaluated for eligibility. Two studies were included in the qualitative and meta-analyses. These studies included anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC) regimens and cisplatin-based regimens, with palonosetron as the serotonin receptor antagonist. In the two studies, no difference was found in the prevention of vomiting (delayed complete response). However, non-inferiority was not demonstrated in the subgroup that received cisplatin-containing regimens. Delayed complete control showed different results for nausea prevention; however, there was no significant difference in the meta-analysis. Only one report has shown non-inferiority for delayed total control. Although the strength of evidence for individual outcomes varied, there was no difference in the duration of dexamethasone administration. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic therapy with NK1RA and palonosetron can be used to prevent CINV in HEC, limited to AC combination therapy.

Defining the clinical benefits of adding a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to control chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for antiemesis 2023 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) commonly affects patient quality of life and the overall effectiveness of chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate whether adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) to 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) and corticosteroids provides clinically meaningful benefits in preventing CINV in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web to identify clinical studies evaluating NK1RAs combined with 5-HT3RAs and dexamethasone for managing CINV in MEC. The endpoints were complete response (CR), complete control (CC), total control (TC), adverse events, and costs. The data were analyzed using a random effects model. RESULTS: From 142 articles identified, 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involving 4,405 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Approximately 60% of the patients received carboplatin (CBDCA)-based chemotherapy. The meta-analysis showed that triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with NK1RA was significantly more effective for achieving CR than doublet prophylaxis in each phase. Regarding CC, the triplet antiemetic prophylaxis was significantly more effective than the doublet in the overall (risk difference [RD]: 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.17) and delayed (RD: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.13) phases. For TC, no significant differences were observed in any phase. Adding NK1RA did not cause adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adding NK1RA to CBDCA-based chemotherapy has shown clinical benefits. However, the clinical benefits of NK1RA-containing regimens for overall MEC have not yet been established and require RCTs that exclusively evaluate MEC regimens other than CBDCA-based chemotherapy.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy with paclitaxel for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in older patients (PARADISE-1): a phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: In older patients, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is difficult to treat using standard therapies, including surgery and cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy. Paclitaxel (PTX) has radiosensitizing activity. We conducted a phase I trial of PTX combined with radiotherapy to establish a standard therapy for locally advanced ESCC in older patients. METHODS: Enrollment was conducted at six centers in Japan from April 2016 to September 2019. The participants were aged ≥ 70 years, had locally advanced ESCC, and were intolerant to surgery or unwilling. A fixed 60-Gy radiation dose was administered in 30 fractions. PTX dosing levels started at 30 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks. Depending on the number of DLTs, the dose was set to be increased by 10 mg/m2 or switched to biweekly. A geriatric assessment was performed before treatment using the Geriatric-8 screening tool. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). RESULTS: We enrolled 24 patients (6 per group); DLT was observed in one (grade 4 hypokalemia), one (grade 3 aspiration), two (grade 3 radiodermatitis, grade 3 esophageal hemorrhage), and two (grade 3 anorexia, grade 5 pneumonitis) patients in the weekly PTX 30, 40, 50, and 60 mg/m2 groups, respectively. All adverse events, except death in the 60 mg/m2 group, showed reversible improvement, and the safety profile was considered acceptable. The 2-year survival and complete response rates were 40.0% and 54.2%, respectively. There was a significant difference in survival between favorable and unfavorable Geriatric-8 scores. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended PTX dose with concomitant radiation was determined to be 50 mg/m2 weekly. Phase II trials at this dose are underway.

Non-pharmacological treatments for anticipatory nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antiemesis 2023.

BACKGROUND: Anticipatory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a conditioned response influenced by the severity and duration of previous emetic responses to chemotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of non-pharmacologic interventions for anticipatory CINV among patients with cancer. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Ichushi-Web, from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2020. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized designs, observational studies, or case-control studies that utilized non-pharmacological therapies were included. The primary outcomes were anticipatory CINV, with an additional investigation into adverse events and the costs of therapies. The risk-of-bias for each study was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4 software. RESULTS: Of the 107 studies identified, six met the inclusion criteria. Three types of non-pharmacological treatments were identified: systematic desensitization (n = 2), hypnotherapy (n = 2), and yoga therapy (n = 2). Among them, systematic desensitization significantly improved anticipatory CINV as compared to that in the control group (nausea: risk ratio [RR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49-0.72, p < 0.00001; vomiting: RR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.32-0.91, p = 0.02). However, heterogeneity in outcome measures precluded meta-analysis for hypnotherapy and yoga. Additionally, most selected studies had a high or unclear risk of bias, and adverse events were not consistently reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that systematic desensitization may effectively reduce anticipatory CINV. However, further research is warranted before implementation in clinical settings.

2023 Japan Society of clinical oncology clinical practice guidelines update for antiemesis.

BACKGROUND: The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antiemesis 2023 was extensively revised to reflect the latest advances in antineoplastic agents, antiemetics, and antineoplastic regimens. This update provides new evidence on the efficacy of antiemetic regimens. METHODS: Guided by the Minds Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual of 2017, a rigorous approach was used to update the guidelines; a thorough literature search was conducted from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2020. RESULTS: Comprehensive process resulted in the creation of 13 background questions (BQs), 12 clinical questions (CQs), and three future research questions (FQs). Moreover, the emetic risk classification was also updated. CONCLUSIONS: The primary goal of the present guidelines is to provide comprehensive information and facilitate informed decision-making, regarding antiemetic therapy, for both patients and healthcare providers.

Efficacy, safety, and biomarker analysis of nivolumab in combination with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in patients with HR-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a phase II study (WJOG11418B NEWFLAME trial).

BACKGROUND: Hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer is a disease for which no immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise as effective therapies. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors synergistically increased the effectiveness of antiprogrammed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies in preclinical studies. METHODS: This non-randomized, multicohort, phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab 240 mg administered every 2 weeks in combination with the CDK4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib 150 mg twice daily and either fulvestrant (FUL) or letrozole (LET) as a first-line or second-line treatment for HR-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR), and secondary end points were toxicity, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Blood, tissue, and fecal samples were collected at multiple points for correlative studies to evaluate immunity biomarkers. RESULTS: From June 2019 to early study termination due to safety concerns on July 2020, 17 patients were enrolled (FUL: n=12, LET: n=5). One patient with a prior treatment history in the FUL cohort was excluded. ORRs were 54.5% (6/11) and 40.0% (2/5) in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively. Treatment-emergent (TE) adverse events (AEs) of grade ≥3 occurred in 11 (92%) and 5 (100%) patients in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were neutropenia (7 (58.3%) and 3 (60.0%) in the FUL and LET cohorts, respectively), followed by alanine aminotransferase elevation (5 (41.6%) and 4 (80.0%)). One treatment-related death from interstitial lung disease occurred in the LET cohort. Ten patients developed liver-related grade ≥3 AEs. Liver biopsy specimens from 3 patients showed hepatitis characterized by focal necrosis with predominant CD8+ lymphocyte infiltration. Marked elevation of tumor necrosis factor-related cytokines and interleukin-11, and a decrease in peripheral regulatory T cells (Tregs), were observed in patients with hepatotoxicity. These findings suggest that treatment-related toxicities were immune-related AEs likely caused by proinflammatory cytokine production and suppression of Treg proliferation due to the addition of abemaciclib to nivolumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although the combination of nivolumab and abemaciclib was active, it caused severe and prolonged immune-related AEs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: JapicCTI-194782, jRCT2080224706, UMIN000036970.

Significance of the comprehensive geriatric assessment in the administration of chemotherapy to older adults with cancer: Recommendations by the Japanese Geriatric Oncology Guideline Committee.

INTRODUCTION: The number of older patients with cancer is expected to continue to increase owing to the aging population. Recently, the usefulness of geriatric assessment (GA) conducted by multiple staff members from different medical backgrounds has been reported; however, a consensus on the effectiveness of GA has not yet been achieved. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We, as the Japanese Geriatric Oncology Guideline Committee for elderly patients with cancer, conducted a literature search of randomized controlled trials published before August 2021 that used GA or comprehensive GA (CGA) as an intervention for patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. As the key outcomes for answering the clinical question, we focused on survival benefit, adverse events, and quality of life (QOL). After a systematic review of these studies, the expert panel member developed recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: For older patients with cancer, GA or CGA is suggested during or before chemotherapy (weakly recommended). Chemotherapy-induced adverse events were significantly reduced by GA/CGA interventions without any adverse effects on survival. Health-related QOL tended to improve with the GA/CGA interventions. DISCUSSION: Although, in our opinion, GA/CGA does require time and resources, it poses no harm patients. Therefore, we suggest expanding the human resources and educating skills of medical providers for clinical implementation of GA/CGA.

Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of prophylactic olanzapine for patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving T-DXd treatment: protocol for the ERICA study (WJOG14320B).

INTRODUCTION: The antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) has led to a change in the clinical management of breast cancer. Nausea and vomiting are the most common adverse events of T-DXd, which cannot be completely alleviated by standard prophylactic regimens. Olanzapine is particularly effective in preventing delayed nausea caused by chemotherapy. In this study, we will evaluate the efficacy of olanzapine in managing persistent nausea and vomiting during T-DXd treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ERICA study is a multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised phase II study with the aim to evaluate the antiemetic effects of the prophylactic olanzapine (5 mg orally, on days 1-6) or placebo combined with a 1,5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3)-receptor antagonist and dexamethasone in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer undergoing T-DXd treatment. For a period of 22 days from the day of T-DXd treatment, patients will document their experience in an electronic symptom diary daily during observational periods. The primary endpoint is the complete response rate, defined as no vomiting and no rescue medications during the 'delayed phase' of 24-120 hours post-T-DXd administration. In addition, we define 120-504 hour as the 'persistent phase' and 0-504 hours as the 'overall phase' for secondary endpoint analysis. We have estimated that a total sample size of at least 156 patients is needed to allow a power of 80% at a one-sided significance level of 20% in this study. The target sample size is set to 166 to account for possible case exclusions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol is approved by the West Japan Oncology Group protocol review committee and the SHOWA University Clinical Research Review Board. The study results will be presented at international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: jRCTs031210410.

Prospective evaluation of the relationship between response and exposure of total and unbound erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between treatment efficacy and exposure of total and unbound erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-activating mutations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor naïve NSCLC patients were enrolled, and erlotinib was started at 150 mg/day. Total and unbound exposure of erlotinib were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 70 enrolled patients, 61 had EGFR-activating mutations (30 patients with exon 19 deletions, 31 patients with L858R). The median area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) of total and unbound erlotinib on day 1 was 37,004 ng·h/mL (range, 9683-63,257 ng·h/mL) and 2338 ng·h/mL (581-5904 ng·h/mL), respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.9 months, and PFS did not differ between each tertile of total and unbound AUC0-24 on day 1 in 59 patients with EGFR-activating mutations. The worst grade of skin toxicities was significantly correlated with total trough concentration at steady state (Ctrough,ss) at each visit for 3 months after the initiation of erlotinib treatment (P < 0.0001). Total and unbound Ctrough,ss on day 7-15 in 20 patients whose dose was reduced due to intolerable toxicities was significantly higher than those in 48 patients whose dose was unchanged for 3 months (P = 0.0046, 0.0008). CONCLUSION: The lack of relationship between efficacy and exposure of total and unbound erlotinib demonstrates that the standard dose of 150 mg/day is sufficient for the treatment of NSCLC harboring EGFR-activating mutations, despite wide inter-individual variability in exposure and dose reduction. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000012862.

Evaluation of clinical validity of an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function using data of the SPIRITS and the G-SOX trials.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical validity of the S-1 dosage formula based on body surface area (BSA) and creatinine clearance (CLcr) to achieve the target area under the concentration-time curve of 5-FU, which we had developed and refined in each prospective pharmacokinetic study. METHODS: The recommended dose determined by the refined formula was assessed using data of the SPIRITS (S-1 vs. S-1 plus cisplatin [SP]) and the G-SOX (SP vs. S-1 plus oxaliplatin [SOX]) trials. Nine hundred and thirty-eight patients in these trials were classified into three groups according to their actual S-1 starting doses compared with the recommended doses (under-dosed, recommended dose). RESULTS: The patients in the under-dosed group in both trials showed similar tendencies: male, younger, higher BSA, and higher CLcr. The incidence of any grade neutropenia was significantly greater in the over-dosed group compared with the equal-dosed group in the S-1 and the SOX arms. The hazard ratios (HR) of overall survival (OS) (under-dosed vs. equal-dosed) were 1.361 (S-1 arm), 1.259 (SP arm) in the SPIRITS trial, and 1.381 (SOX arm), 0.999 (SP arm) in the G-SOX trial. Multivariate analysis in all the patients demonstrated that OS of the over-dosed group was equivalent (HR 1.002, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.850-1.182, p = 0.980) and that of the under-dosed group was inferior (HR 1.267, 95% CI 1.005-1.597, p = 0.045) to the equal-dosed group. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that the refined S-1 dosage formula can recommend optimal dose in terms of safety and efficacy.

Japanese Lung Cancer Society Guidelines for Stage IV NSCLC With EGFR Mutations.

Patients with NSCLC in East Asia, including Japan, frequently contain EGFR mutations. In 2018, we published the latest full clinical practice guidelines on the basis of those provided by the Japanese Lung Cancer Society Guidelines Committee. The purpose of this study was to update those recommendations, especially for the treatment of metastatic or recurrent EGFR-mutated NSCLC. We conducted a literature search of systematic reviews of randomized controlled and nonrandomized trials published between 2018 and 2019 that multiple physicians had reviewed independently. On the basis of those studies and the advice from the Japanese Society of Lung Cancer Expert Panel, we developed updated guidelines according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We also evaluated the benefits of overall and progression-free survival, end points, toxicities, and patients' reported outcomes. For patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR-activating mutations, the use of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs), especially osimertinib, had the best recommendation as to first-line treatment. We also recommended the combination of EGFR TKI with other agents (platinum-based chemotherapy or antiangiogenic agents); however, it can lead to toxicity. In the presence of EGFR uncommon mutations, except for an exon 20 insertion, we also recommended the EGFR TKI treatment. However, we could not provide recommendations for the treatment of EGFR mutations with immune checkpoint inhibitors, including monotherapy, and its combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy, because of the limited evidence present in the literature. The 2020 Japanese Lung Cancer Society Guidelines can help community-based physicians to determine the most appropriate treatments and adequately provide medical care to their patients.

A case report on severe nivolumab-induced adverse events similar to primary sclerosing cholangitis refractory to immunosuppressive therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), particularly anti-PD-1 antibody, have dramatically changed cancer treatment; however, fatal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can develop. Here, we describe a severe case of sclerosing cholangitis-like irAE. We report the use of 3 immunosuppressive agents that resulted in the death of the patient due to treatment inefficacy. According to a postmarketing study of nivolumab, the frequency of ICI-related sclerosing cholangitis is 0.27% and that of ICI-related cholangitis is 0.20%. There have been 4 case reports of sclerosing cholangitis-like irAE, with imaging findings, including typical intrahepatic bile duct beaded constriction in primary sclerosing cholangitis. Treatment starts with prednisolone and is combined with an immunosuppressant in refractory cases. There are no reports of severe cases that ultimately led to death. PATIENTS CONCERNS: The patient is a 64-year-old male with Stage IV squamous cell lung carcinoma; he was hospitalized with abdominal pain and elevation of aspartate transaminase and alanine transaminase, approximately 4 months after ICI administration was suspended. This occurred because the patient treated with nivolumab as the second-line chemotherapy and developed type 1 diabetes mellitus after 11 courses. DIAGNOSIS: A grade 3 increase in bilirubin was observed and he was diagnosed with sclerosing cholangitis, based on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography imaging and pathological findings of the liver and bile duct. INTERVENTIONS: Prednisolone, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus combination therapy was administered. OUTCOMES: The treatment was difficult and failed. He died from liver failure 8 months after diagnosis. In this case, hepatitis and cholangitis, mainly alanine transaminase-dominant liver disorder, developed in the early stages of irAEs. Although he showed some improvement after prednisolone administration, bilirubin levels began rising again, and sclerosing cholangitis did not improve even with the use of 3 immunosuppressive agents recommended by the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for immune-related hepatotoxicity management. Although the antitumor effect showed a complete response, liver failure led to death. CONCLUSION: This is the first case report on the ineffectiveness of triple immunosuppressant combination therapy recommended by the guidelines for immune-related hepatotoxicity. It is necessary to develop more appropriate treatment for severe sclerosing cholangitis-like irAE based on the robust evidence.

Phase I study of afatinib plus bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR mutations.

BACKGROUND: Afatinib is a second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Combination therapies with first-generation EGFR-TKIs and bevacizumab have been reported to prolong progression-free survival (PFS). However, there are few data on the combination of afatinib and bevacizumab. METHODS: In this phase I trial, we evaluated the safety of afatinib plus bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR mutations. This study consisted of two cohorts. In the dose-finding cohort, enrolled patients were treated with afatinib at a dose of 20, 30, or 40 mg/day (days 1-21) plus bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg/kg (day 1) in 21-day cycles. This cohort was performed according to a 3 + 3 manner. In the expansion cohort, enrolled patients received the recommended dose (RD) based on the results of the dose-finding cohort. The serum trough concentration of afatinib was determined at the steady state. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were enrolled in this study (6 patients in the dose-finding cohort and 11 patients in the expansion cohort). There were no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) with afatinib at a dose of 30 mg/day. With afatinib at a dose of 40 mg/day, two of two patients experienced DLTs (grade 3 diarrhea) in cycle 1. With these results, afatinib at a dose of 30 mg/day plus bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg/kg was determined as the RD. Eleven patients in the expansion cohort were treated with the RD. Common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) with the RD were diarrhea (79%), rash (71%), perionychia (64%), and stomatitis (50%). Grade 3 AEs with the RD were diarrhea (7%), perionychia (7%), and hypertension (7%). There were no grade 4/5 AEs or cases of interstitial lung disease. Dose-proportional increases in serum afatinib trough concentrations at steady state were not observed. The response rates (RRs) and disease control rates were 55% and 100% in EGFR-TKI-naïve patients. Re-biopsy was performed in eight patients after progressive disease following the study treatment, and three patients acquired a T790M mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Afatinib at a dose of 30 mg/day plus bevacizumab at a dose of 15 mg/kg q3w is well tolerated.

Prospective evaluation and refinement of an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function for clinical application.

In patients with impaired renal function, S-1-related toxicities increase due to higher exposure of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Our previous pharmacokinetic study in 16 cancer patients with various renal functions developed an S-1 dosage formula based on individual creatinine clearance (CLcr) and body surface area (BSA). To evaluate and refine the formula, this prospective study was conducted. Thirty-three patients with various renal functions received S-1 for 4 weeks at doses determined by the nomogram derived from the previously developed formula. A series of blood samples were collected after the first dose to calculate the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of 5-FU. Thirty patients with BSA of 1.14-1.84 m2 and CLcr of 23.8-96.4 mL/min were assessable for pharmacokinetics. The observed daily AUC ranged from 712.6 to 2868.7 ng·h/mL, and 18 patients achieved the target AUC (1447.8 ± 545.4 ng·h/mL). Three patients experienced S-1-related grade 3 adverse events during the first course. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis from the combined data of 46 patients in this study and the previous study, sex was identified as a statistically significant covariate for 5-FU clearance. Hence, the refined formula includes sex as an additional factor: Recommended daily dose = target AUC × (14.5 + 8.23 × SEX [0 for female and 1 for male] + 0.301 × CLcr) × BSA. Revised nomograms for recommended daily doses derived from the refined formula can be used in clinical practice to achieve the target AUC ensuring efficacy and safety of S-1.

Optimizing antiemetic treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Japan: Update summary of the 2015 Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antiemesis.

Patients with cancer should appropriately receive antiemetic therapies against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Antiemetic guidelines play an important role in managing CINV. Accordingly, the first Japanese antiemetic guideline published in 2010 by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO) has considerably aided Japanese medical staff in providing antiemetic therapies across chemotherapy clinics. With the yearly advancements in antiemetic therapies, the Japanese antiemetic guidelines require revisions according to published evidence regarding antiemetic management worldwide. A revised version of the first antiemetic guideline that considered several upcoming evidences had been published online in 2014 (version 1.2), in which several updated descriptions were included. The 2015 JSCO clinical practice guideline for antiemesis (version 2.0) (in Japanese) has addressed clinical antiemetic concerns and includes four major revisions regarding (1) changes in emetogenic risk categorization for anti-cancer agents, (2) olanzapine usage as an antiemetic drug, (3) the steroid-sparing method, and (4) adverse drug reactions of antiemetic agents. We herein present an English update summary for the 2015 JSCO clinical practice guideline for antiemesis (version 2.0).

Pharmacokinetics, Efficacy and Safety of Bosutinib in a Pediatric Patient With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

Bosutinib is a second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in adult patients. The safety and efficacy of bosutinib in patients younger than 18 years of age have not been established. We here report the case of a 4-year-old male with CML who was treated with bosutinib during coordination of human leukocyte antigen-matched unrelated bone-marrow transplantation because of insufficient responses to imatinib and dasatinib. The patient achieved a complete cytogenetic response immediately after starting bosutinib at 180 mg/day (290 mg/m2/day). Because toxicity was tolerable, the dose was increased to 200 mg/day (330 mg/m2/day). A complete cytogenetic response was maintained, but a major molecular response was not achieved 6 months after initiation of treatment with bosutinib. At steady state, maximum plasma concentration, minimum plasma concentration, and area under the plasma concentration-time curve were 89.2 ng/mL, 16.7 ng/mL, and 1017.4 ng·hr/mL, respectively, at 290 mg/m2/day; and 141.1 ng/mL, 18.9 ng/mL, and 1278.5 ng·hr/mL, respectively, at 330 mg/m2/day. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report to show the pharmacokinetics of bosutinib with efficacy and safety in a pediatric patient with CML. This rare case in a very young child with CML can also be valuable reference for clinical practice.

Weekly paclitaxel plus ramucirumab versus weekly nab-paclitaxel plus ramucirumab for unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination refractory to first-line therapy-the P-SELECT trial (WJOG10617G)-a randomised phase II trial by the West Japan Oncology Group.

BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab (RAM) with weekly paclitaxel (wPTX) is a standard second-line therapy for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer. Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PTX), an albumin-bound form of PTX, was developed to improve the therapeutic index of taxane treatment. However, the ABSOLUTE trial showed the non-inferiority of weekly nab-PTX (w-nab-PTX) to wPTX with respect to overall survival (OS) as second-line therapy for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer, and subgroup analysis of patients with peritoneal dissemination showed favourable OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in the w-nab-PTX arm compared to those in the wPTX arm. This study evaluated whether w-nab-PTX plus RAM is more effective than wPTX plus RAM for patients with peritoneal dissemination. METHODS: The P-SELECT trial (WJOG10617G) is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised phase II study evaluating wPTX plus RAM (arm A) versus w-nab-PTX plus RAM (arm B). Key eligibility criteria include the following: 1) histologically proven adenocarcinoma, 2) unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer, 3) peritoneal dissemination, 4) intolerance or refractory to first-line therapy including fluoropyrimidines, and 5) ECOG Performance Status (PS) 0-2. Patients are randomised to either arm at a 1:1 ratio stratified by institution, PS, and severity of ascites. PTX (80 mg/m2; days 1, 8, and 15) and RAM (8 mg/kg; days 1 and 15) are administered every 4 weeks in arm A, while nab-PTX (100 mg/m2; days 1, 8, and 15) instead of PTX is administered in arm B. The primary endpoint is OS, and the main secondary endpoints are PFS, objective response rate, safety, neuropathy-specific quality of life, and biomarkers. To maintain a probability of ≥70% to ensure the hazard ratio for OS in arm B is lower than 0.90, 105 subjects are required. The study was initiated in October 2018 and is being conducted in 58 centres of the West Japan Oncology Group. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will determine whether w-nab-PTX plus RAM has the potential to be a preferred therapeutic option for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination, compared to wPTX plus RAM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs031180022, October 1, 2018).

A double-blind, randomized, multicenter phase 3 study of palonosetron vs granisetron combined with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer receiving anthracycline and cyclophosphamide.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether palonosetron is better than granisetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in a three-drug combination with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant (Fos) in patients with breast cancer who are placed on anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC-based regimen). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemo-naive women with primary breast cancer were randomly administered either palonosetron 0.75 mg (day 1) or granisetron 1 mg (day 1) combined with dexamethasone (12 mg at day 1, 8 mg at day 2 and day 3) and Fos 150 mg (day 1) before receiving AC-based regimen in a double-blind study. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate of emesis in cycle 1 in the delayed phase. This was defined as neither vomiting nor rescue drug usage for emesis at >24-120 hours after chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were the CR in the acute/overall phase (0-24/0-120 hours, respectively, after chemotherapy), no nausea and vomiting, Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and safety. RESULTS: From December 2012 to October 2014, 326 patients were treated and evaluated (164/162 evaluable patients in granisetron/palonosetron arm, respectively). The CR during the delayed phase was 60.4% in the granisetron regimen and 62.3% in the palonosetron regimen. The CR during acute phase (73.2% vs 75.9%, respectively) and the CR during overall phase (54.9% in both regimens) were very identical. A significantly higher number of patients in the palonosetron arm were free from nausea during the delayed phase (28% vs 40.1%; P = .029). Adverse events were also identical, although infusion site reactions (ISR) were higher (20.3%-23.3%) than preceding studies in both regimens. CONCLUSION: In combination with dexamethasone and Fos, this study suggests that palonosetron is not better than granisetron in chemo-naive patients with primary breast cancer receiving AC-based regimen. Administration of Fos in peripheral veins after AC-based regimen increased ISR.

Evaluation of gefitinib systemic exposure in EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer patients with gefitinib-induced severe hepatotoxicity.

PURPOSE: Severe hepatotoxicity induced by the standard dose of gefitinib (250 mg daily) often becomes manageable by dose reduction to 250 mg every other day. Thus, we hypothesized that systemic exposure of standard-dose gefitinib in patients with experience of severe hepatotoxicity might be higher than that in patients without severe hepatotoxicity. METHODS: Patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer who were receiving gefitinib either at a reduced dose (250 mg every other day) because of intolerable severe toxicity or at a standard dose (250 mg daily) were enrolled. A series of blood samples were collected to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters and calculate systemic exposure of standard-dose gefitinib (area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h at steady state, AUC0-24,ss). Systemic exposure of unbound gefitinib (fu·AUC0-24,ss) was also assessed, because gefitinib is extensively bound to serum proteins. RESULTS: Of the 38 enrolled patients, 34 (23 patients without experience of severe hepatotoxicity, 11 patients with experience of severe hepatotoxicity) were evaluable. There was no significant differences in total AUC0-24,ss or unbound fu·AUC0-24,ss between patients with and without experience of severe hepatotoxicity. Analysis of the time to severe hepatotoxicity indicated no difference between patients with a high AUC0-24,ss and those with a low AUC0-24,ss of either total or unbound gefitinib. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that reversible severe hepatotoxicity is not caused by high systemic exposure of gefitinib.