Factors associated with early discontinuation of anamorelin in patients with cancer-associated cachexia.

PURPOSE: Cancer-associated cachexia, a multifactorial syndrome involving loss of muscle mass and anorexia, is an unremitting problem for cancer patients. Anamorelin has become available for cancer-associated cachexia, but early discontinuation is common in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore factors related to the early discontinuation of anamorelin and its relationship to survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, observational study of multimodal clinical practice involved patients who took anamorelin (100 mg) for cancer-associated cachexia at Aichi Medical University Hospital between 14 May 2021 and 31 March 2022. In July 2022, clinical data were extracted from electronic clinical records. Patients who discontinued anamorelin less than 4 weeks after initiation were defined as the early discontinuation group, and their clinical data and survival time were compared with those of the continuation group. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the university (approval no. 2021-124). RESULTS: Of the 42 patients treated with anamorelin, 40 (median age 72.5 years, median BMI 18.7 kg/m2) were analyzed, including 13 with non-small cell lung cancer, and 12 with pancreatic, 8 with colorectal, and 7 with gastric cancers. On univariate analysis, the early discontinuation group included more patients with worse performance status (PS) (p=0.028), low prognostic nutritional index (PNI) (p=0.001), and no concomitant anticancer drugs (p=0.003). On multivariate analysis, PS and PNI were related to anamorelin continuation. Survival time was significantly shorter in the early discontinuation group (p=0.039). CONCLUSION: Worse PS and low PNI were associated with early discontinuation of anamorelin. Longer survival time was observed in the continuation group.

Cost-utility analysis of aprepitant for patients who truly need it in Japan.

PURPOSE: Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) is recommended to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients who receive highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC, respectively). We previously reported that aprepitant, an NK1RA, was needed to control CINV in 43% and 12% of patients who received HEC and MEC, respectively (Support Care Cancer 23:905-912, 2015). To elucidate the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant in these patients, a cost-utility analysis according to the necessity of aprepitant was performed. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed according to the necessity of aprepitant and CINV responses in both acute and delayed phases of chemotherapy. Probabilities of health states and medical costs were derived from the results of the abovementioned trial. RESULT: In patients who received HEC and needed aprepitant, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with aprepitant, relative to the regimen with no aprepitant, was 7912 US dollars (USD) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, which was far below the commonly accepted threshold of 50,000 USD/QALY. The ICER was 27,457 USD/QALY in patients who received MEC and needed aprepitant. In contrast, in patients who received HEC or MEC but did not need aprepitant, the ICER was 175,959 or 478,844 USD/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSION: Regardless of whether a patient received HEC or MEC, aprepitant use was highly cost-effective for patients who truly needed it. These results warrant further research to predict the necessity of NK1RA treatment before initiating emetogenic chemotherapies.

Cost-effectiveness of aprepitant in Japanese patients treated with cisplatin-containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains a major adverse event in cancer chemotherapy. Although aprepitant is effective in preventing CINV, an increment in financial burden for uniform use of aprepitant is a concern. The aim of the present study was to define the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant from the perspective of the Japanese National Health Insurance system. Based on the results of a randomized phase II trial comparing an aprepitant-containing regimen versus a nonaprepitant regimen in Japanese patients who received cisplatin-containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy, a decision analytic model was developed. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated both in the outpatient care setting (OCS) and in the inpatient care setting (ICS). The use of the aprepitant-containing regimen was associated with improved quality of life compared with the nonaprepitant regimen, with an increment in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of 0.0016. The incremental total medical costs associated with the use of the aprepitant regimen were lower in the OCS than in the ICS, 6192 JPY (56.92 USD) and 9820 JPY (90.27 USD), respectively. The ICER was calculated as 3 906 698 JPY (35 910 USD) per QALY gained in the OCS and 6 195 781 JPY (56 952 USD) per QALY gained in the ICS. Cost-effectiveness of the aprepitant-containing antiemetic therapy was limited to the OCS, considering the threshold of willingness-to-pay commonly accepted (5 million JPY [45 960 USD] in Japan and 50 000 USD in the USA). The efficacy of aprepitant offsets the costs for revisiting clinics or rehospitalization added with rescue medications in the OCS.