Mirtazapine plus granisetron and dexamethasone for carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with thoracic cancers: A prospective multicenter phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Mirtazapine blocks 5-hydroxytryptamine type (5-HT)2A, 5-HT2C, 5-HT3 and histamine H1 receptors, similarly to olanzapine. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine plus granisetron and dexamethasone for carboplatin (CBDCA)-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with thoracic cancers. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial in four institutions in Japan. Registered patients were moderately to highly emetogenic chemotherapy-naïve, and were scheduled to receive CBDCA at area under the curve (AUC) ≥ 4 mg/mL per minute. Patients received mirtazapine 15 mg/day orally at bedtime for four consecutive days, in combination with granisetron and dexamethasone. Primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no emesis and no use of rescue medication) rate during the delayed period (24-120 h). RESULTS: Between July 2022 and July 2023, 52 patients were enrolled, and 48 patients were evaluated. CR rates in the delayed (24-120 h), overall (0-120 h), and acute periods (0-24 h) were 83.3%, 83.3%, and 100%, respectively. No grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were observed except for one patient who had grade 3 dry mouth as evaluated by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic antiemetic therapy with mirtazapine plus granisetron and dexamethasone shows promising efficacy and an acceptable safety profile. This three-drug combination appears to be a reasonable treatment approach in patients with thoracic cancers receiving a CBDCA-based regimen at AUC ≥ 4 mg/mL per minute.

Efficacy and safety of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation in older patients with cancer: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are pain relievers that are often associated with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) that worsens with age. We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis on the efficacy and safety of naldemedine, an opioid receptor antagonist, in treating OIC in patients with cancer (age >75 years). METHODS: The electronic medical records of cancer patients who received naldemedine at 10 Japanese institutions between 7 June 2017 and August 31, 2019, were retrieved. Patients aged ≥75 years who were treated with naldemedine for the first time and hospitalized for at least 7 days before and after initiating naldemedine therapy were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Sixty patients were observed for at least 7 days before and after starting naldemedine. The response rate was 68.3%, and the frequency of bowel movements increased significantly after naldemedine administration in the overall population ( P  < 0.0001) and among those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine administration ( P  < 0.0001). Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event in all grades, observed in 45% of patients, of which 92.6% were Grade 1 or 2. Grade 4 or higher adverse events, including death, were not observed. CONCLUSION: Naldemedine exhibits significant efficacy and safety in OIC treatment in older patients with cancer.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of thalidomide in tumor-bearing dogs.

Thalidomide, an angiogenesis inhibitor, has recently been used to treat malignant canine tumors. This study retrospectively investigated the adverse events (AEs) of thalidomide administered to tumor-bearing dogs. We investigated the pharmacokinetics of thalidomide after administration and the rate of body weight change before and after administration. The initial thalidomide dose was 5 mg/kg per os once daily, which was increased to 10 mg/kg once daily in dogs with no significant AEs. Pharmacokinetics were measured in four dogs after the 5 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg dose. We evaluated AEs related to clinical signs in 51 patients; 9/51 had lethargy, 6/51 had tremor, 4/51 had dizziness, 31/51 had decreased appetite, 8/51 had vomiting, and 16/49 had soft stool/diarrhea. We evaluated hematologic toxicity in 44 patients with grade 3 or higher adverse events; 1/44 had thrombocytopenia, 1/44 had increased blood urea nitrogen concentrations, and 5/44 had increased alanine aminotransferase activities. The mean thalidomide blood levels were Cmax=1.4 ± 0.7 µg/mL (Area under the curve [AUC]0-24=8.5 ± 4.7 µg•hr /mL) and Cmax=3.2 ± 2.1 µg/mL (AUC0-24=22.0 ± 14.7 µg•hr/mL) in the 5 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg groups, respectively. The Cmax and AUC in the 10 mg/kg group were comparable to the effective blood concentrations seen in humans administered thalidomide. The weight fluctuation rates were assessed in 24 dogs approximately 1 month after the start of thalidomide administration; more than half showed weight maintenance or gain. Most AEs were clinically acceptable; however, peripheral nerve signs were seen in some dogs.

Efficacy of Olanzapine in Addition to Standard Triplet Antiemetic Therapy for Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy: A Secondary Analysis of the J-FORCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is unknown whether olanzapine combined with triplet antemetic therapy is effective for all patients undergoing highly emetogenic chemotherapy. A secondary analysis of randomized clinical trials using olanzapine may provide insight into the effectiveness of olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), including cisplatin. Objective: To examine the add-on effect of olanzapine according to risk factors for CINV. Design, Setting, and Participants: This preplanned secondary analysis evaluated results of the J-FORCE trial, a large double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trial conducted in Japan from February 9, 2017, to July 18, 2018. Participants were enrolled from 26 participating hospitals across Japan and included patients aged 20 to 75 years who had a malignant tumor and were cisplatin-naive. The efficacy analysis population of the J-FORCE trial was analyzed according to allocation adjustment factors (sex [male or female], age [≥55 years or <55 years], and cisplatin dose [≥70 mg/m2 or <70 mg/m2]) and patient-related risk factors (history of motion sickness, drinking habit [defined as alcoholic drinks consumption in excess of occasional drinking], and history of morning sickness during pregnancy). Statistical analysis was performed from February 18 to April 18, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive 5 mg of olanzapine or placebo combined with standard triplet antiemetic therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was complete response (CR, defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue medication) in the delayed phase (24-120 hours after cisplatin-based chemotherapy administration). Secondary end points were CR, complete control, and total control in the acute, delayed, and overall phases for 6 CINV risk factors as well as time to treatment failure. The CR point estimates and 95% CIs of the differences between groups were calculated, and a Mantel-Haenszel test was performed. Results: Of the 705 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.0 [9.2] years; 471 males [66.8%]) included in the efficacy analysis population; 581 patients (82.4%) were 55 years or older, and 526 (74.6%) were treated with a cisplatin dose of 70 mg/m2 or more. Risk difference (RD) for a CR in the delayed phase was significantly greater in the olanzapine group than the placebo group in males (RD, 12.6% [95% CI, 5.0%-20.1%]; P = .001); in females (RD, 14.5% [95% CI, 2.2%-26.3%]; P = .02); in those 55 years or older (RD, 11.1% [95% CI, 3.9%-18.2%]; P = .003) or younger than 55 years (RD, 23.6% [95% CI, 7.3%-38.3%]; P = .005); for a cisplatin dose of 70 mg/m2 or more (RD, 13.5% [95% CI, 5.9%-21.0%]; P < .001); for those without a history of motion sickness (RD, 13.9% [95% CI, 6.9%-20.6%]; P < .001); for those with a drinking habit (RD, 14.9% [95% CI, 6.1%-23.4%]; P = .001) or without a drinking habit (RD, 12.0% [95% CI, 2.5%-21.3%]; P = .01); and for those with a history of morning sickness during pregnancy (RD, 27.2% [9.7%-42.6%]; P = .002). In other subgroups, a delayed CR was higher in the olanzapine group than the placebo group, although not significantly higher. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggest a benefit of using 5 mg of olanzapine plus triplet antiemetic therapy to counter CINV regardless of the presence or absence of risk factors. Trial Registration: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: UMIN000024676.

Efficacy and safety of naldemedine treatment for opioid-induced constipation in gastrointestinal cancer: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal cancers are one of the most common cancer cases worldwide. Cancer treatment is multidisciplinary, which includes opioid pain management. Opioid analgesics cause opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with the onset of effect. Naldemedine, a peripheral opioid receptor antagonist, is an OIC-modifying agent, but no focused efficacy and safety analysis has been conducted for its use in gastrointestinal cancers. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with naldemedine at ten institutions in Japan from June 2017 to August 2019. Patients with gastrointestinal cancer who initiated treatment with opioids during hospitalization and were treated with naldemedine for the first time were included in the study. The gastrointestinal cancer types included were esophageal, gastric, small bowel, and colorectal cancers. We assessed the defecation frequency before and after the initiation of naldemedine use. Responders were defined as patients who defecated three or more times/week, with an increase from the baseline of one or more bowel movements/week over seven days after starting naldemedine. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were observed for one week before and after starting naldemedine. Twenty-one patients had an increase in defecation frequency of at least three times per week or at least once per week above the baseline. The response rate was 63.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 46.6-77.9%]. The median number of bowel movements for a week before and after the initiation of naldemedine treatment was 3 (range, 0-13) and 7 (range, 1-39), respectively, in the overall population (n=33), with a significant increase in defecation frequency following naldemedine administration (Wilcoxon signed rank test, P<0.005). Diarrhea was the predominant gastrointestinal symptom, with 13 (39.4%) patients experiencing grade 1 and none experiencing grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events. The frequency of other grade 1 adverse events was low abdominal pain in two patients, nausea in two patients, and anorexia in one patient, without any grade 2-4 adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study suggest that naldemedine is effective and safe in clinical practice for gastrointestinal cancer treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Naldemedine Administration for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Cancer Patients with Poor Performance Status.

Background: Constipation is a concern among patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 3 and 4. Objectives: To assess naldemedine's efficacy and safety in cancer patients on opioids with poor PS. Design: Multicenter, retrospective study. Setting/Subjects: Japanese cancer patients with ECOG performance status 3 or 4 who received naldemedine. Measurements: Frequency of defecations before/after naldemedine use. Responders were patients whose defecation frequency increased to ≥3 times/week, from baseline ≥1 defecations/week over seven days after naldemedine administration. Results: Seventy-one patients were analyzed; 66.1% were responders (95% confidence interval: 54.5%-76.1%). Defecation frequency increased significantly after naldemedine in the overall population (6 vs. 2, p < 0.0001) and among those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine (4.5 vs. 1, p < 0.0001). Diarrhea (38.0%) of all grades was the most common adverse event; 23 (85.2%) events were classified as Grade 1 or 2. Conclusion: Naldemedine is effective and safe among cancer patients with poor PS.

A Retrospective Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Naldemedine for Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Cancer.

Background and Objectives: Opioid analgesics, which are used for cancer-related pain management, cause opioid-induced constipation (OIC). Naldemedine, a peripheral opioid receptor antagonist, is an OIC-modifying agent, but no focused efficacy and safety analysis has been conducted for its use in hepatobiliary pancreatic cancers. We performed a multi-institutional study on the efficacy and safety of naldemedine in patients with hepatobiliary pancreatic cancer using opioids in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with hepatobiliary pancreatic cancer (including liver, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancers) treated with opioids and naldemedine during hospitalization at ten institutions in Japan from June 2017 to August 2019. We assessed the frequency of bowel movements before and after the initiation of naldemedine therapy. Responders were defined as patients who defecated ≥3 times/week, with an increase from a baseline of ≥1 defecations/week over seven days after the initiation of naldemedine administration. Results: Thirty-four patients were observed for one week before and one week after starting naldemedine. The frequency of bowel movements increased by one over the baseline frequency or to at least thrice per week in 21 patients. The response rate was 61.7% (95% confidence interval: 45.4-78.0%). The median number of weekly bowel movements before and after naldemedine treatment was 2 (range: 0-9) and 6 (range: 1-17), respectively, in the overall population (n = 34); the increase in the number of bowel movements following naldemedine administration was statistically significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p < 0.0001). Diarrhea was the predominant gastrointestinal symptom, and 10 (29.4%) patients experienced grade 1, grade 2, or grade 3 adverse events. The only other adverse event included fatigue in one patient; grade 2-4 adverse events were absent. Conclusions: Naldemedine is effective, and its use may be safe in clinical practice for patients with hepatobiliary pancreatic cancer receiving opioid analgesics.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia as a prognostic factor in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is a dose-limiting factor for cytotoxic chemotherapy, but recently, it was suggested that CIN contributes to prolonged survival. In this study, we examined the association between severe CIN and survival and determined whether CIN affected survival in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). METHODS: The medical records from 214 patients with ES-SCLC treated with etoposide or irinotecan in combination with cisplatin (EP/IP) between 2012 and 2016 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Landmark analysis was performed at the end of cycle 4, and the relationship between severe CIN and survival was determined by a log-rank test. In addition, a multivariate analysis using the COX proportional hazard model was performed to identify independent predictive factors. The Landmark analysis included 102 patients in the IP group and 47 patients in the EP group. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between grades 0-3 and grade 4 neutropenia and overall survival (OS) in the EP group (P = 0.57). Contrariwise, for the IP patients, the median OS was 444 days for grades 0-3 and 633 days for grade 4 neutropenia, which was significantly longer for patients who developed grade 4 neutropenia (P = 0.03). Multivariate analysis adjusted for potential factors revealed that the development of grade 4 CIN was identified as a significant predictor of longer OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-0.87, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: The results indicated that the development of severe CIN with IP therapy is associated with prolonged OS.

Association between the Co-administration of Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists and the Effectiveness of Capecitabine in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Propensity Score Analysis.

Background: The association between the effectiveness of capecitabine and the concomitant administration of gastric acid suppressants remains controversial. We aimed to clarify whether the effectiveness of capecitabine is affected by the co-administration of histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) patients using real-world data. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective, observational study included consecutive patients with stage II-III CRC who received either capecitabine monotherapy or the CapeOX regimen (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) as adjuvant therapy between January 2009 and December 2014 in Japan. Relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Additionally, multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, propensity score adjustment, and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses were performed. Results: In total, 552 patients were included in this study, of which 30 were co-administered H2RAs. RFS at five years was 76.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 57.2-88.1%) and 79.8% (95% CI: 76.0-83.0%) in the H2RA and non-H2RA groups, respectively. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model and propensity score-adjusted analyses showed that the co-administration of H2RAs was associated with a poor RFS among those receiving capecitabine monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.01; 95% CI: 0.86-4.70 and HR, 1.81; 95% CI: 0.77-4.22, respectively). In contrast, these results were inconsistent with the group receiving the CapeOX regimen. Conclusions: The study findings suggest that the co-administration of H2RAs may not reduce the effectiveness of capecitabine therapy in patients with early-stage CRC. To confirm this relationship, a prospective study with a pharmacokinetic approach is needed.

A retrospective study of the efficacy and safety of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation in thoracic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study on the efficacy and safety of naldemedine in thoracic cancer patients using opioids in clinical practice. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated thoracic cancer patients treated with naldemedine at 10 institutions in Japan. Clinical data of patients administered naldemedine between June 2017 and August 2019 were extracted from electronic medical records. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (i) patients hospitalized for at least seven days before and after naldemedine administration, and (ii) those whose frequency of defecation was entered in the medical records. RESULTS: Forty patients were analyzed, and defecation frequency was observed for at least seven days before and after naldemedine administration. The response rate was 65.0% (95% CI: 50.2%-79.7%). The number of defecations increased significantly after naldemedine administration in the overall population, as well as among only those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine administration, and those that were administered ≥30 mg/day of morphine equivalent. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event in all grades, occurring in 11 patients (27.5%), of which 9 (81.8%) were grade 1 or 2. None of the patients experienced grade 4 or higher adverse events. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of naldemedine for thoracic cancer patients in clinical practice were comparable with those of prospective studies, which suggest that naldemedine may be effective and feasible for most thoracic cancer patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Naldemedine for Patients with Cancer with Opioid-Induced Constipation in Clinical Practice: A Real-World Retrospective Study.

The efficacy and safety of naldemedine for opioid-induced constipation in patients with cancer has not been investigated in clinical practice. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study to assess the effects of naldemedine among 10 Japanese institutions between June 2017 and August 2019. We evaluated the number of defecations 7 days before and after naldemedine administration. A total of 149 patients (89 male) with a median age of 72 years (range, 38−96) were included. The performance status was 0−1, 2, and ≥3 in 40, 38, and 71 patients, respectively. The median opioid dose in oral morphine equivalents was 30 mg/day (range: 7.5−800 mg). We observed 98 responders and 51 non-responders. The median number of defecations increased significantly in the 7 days following naldemedine administration from three to six (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that an opioid dose <30 mg/day [odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01−4.32; p = 0.042] was significantly correlated with the effect of naldemedine. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event (38.2%) among all grades. The efficacy and safety of naldemedine in clinical practice are comparable to those of prospective studies, suggesting that it is effective in most patients.

Proton pump inhibitors affect capecitabine efficacy in patients with stage II-III colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

The association between capecitabine efficacy and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is controversial. Here, we determined whether co-administration of PPIs affects the real-world effectiveness of capecitabine. This retrospective observational study included consecutive patients with stage II-III colorectal cancer (CRC) who received adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy or CapeOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) between January 2009 and December 2014 at nine participating institutions. The primary endpoint was the difference in relapse-free survival (RFS) between patients who received PPIs and those who did not and was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall survival (OS) was the secondary endpoint. Multivariable analysis of RFS and OS was performed using a Cox proportional hazards model, propensity score adjustment, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. Data from 606 patients were evaluated, 54 of whom had received a PPI. PPI-treated patients tended to have poorer RFS and OS than patients treated without PPIs. The hazard ratio for RFS with capecitabine monotherapy was 2.48 (95% confidence interval: 1.22-5.07). These results were consistent with sensitivity analyses performed using propensity score adjustment and IPTW methods. Co-administration of PPIs may reduce the effectiveness of capecitabine and negatively impact patients with stage II-III CRC.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Arbekacin against Pneumonia in Febrile Neutropenia: A Retrospective Study in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Arbekacin (ABK) is an aminoglycoside that exhibits anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and anti-Pseudomonas aeruginosa activities. Therefore, for patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) and concurrent pneumonia suspected to be caused by MRSA, ABK may be sufficiently effective even as a single agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with hematologic malignancies treated with ABK who met the following criteria were included: 1) fever during neutropenia or functional neutropenia, 2) FN complicated by pneumonia, and 3) possible infection by antimicrobial-resistant Gram-positive cocci. RESULTS: This study encompassed 22 episodes involving 19 patients, of which, 15 (68.2%) were successfully treated with ABK. Of the nine episodes showing inadequate response to other anti-MRSA drugs, eight were successfully treated with ABK. Grade 2 or worse adverse events included acute kidney injury (13.6%) and increased transaminase levels (9.1%). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that ABK is effective and safe in patients with FN and concurrent pneumonia caused by antimicrobial-resistant Gram-positive cocci. ABK may also be effective in patients who are unresponsive to other anti-MRSA drugs. Therefore, ABK may be beneficial in the treatment of pneumonia caused by antimicrobial-resistant Gram-positive cocci in patients with FN.

Effects of adding a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to 5 mg olanzapine, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone for preventing carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine has been reported to be an effective antiemetic in patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) added to olanzapine, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), and dexamethasone (DEX) has not been proven. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NK1RA, in combination with three-drug antiemetic regimens containing olanzapine, in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Data were pooled for 140 patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy from three multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The propensity score of the co-administration of NK1RA was estimated for each patient using a logistic regression model that included age, sex, and carboplatin dose. We analyzed a total of 62 patients, who were treated without NK1RA (non-NK1RA group: 31 patients) and with NK1RA (NK1RA group: 31 patients). The patients were selected using propensity score matching. RESULTS: The complete response rate (without emetic episodes or with no administration of rescue medication) in the overall period (0-120 h post carboplatin administration) was 93.5% in the non-NK1RA group and 96.8% in the NK1RA group, with a difference of -3.2% (95% confidence interval, -18.7% to 10.9%; P = 1.000). In terms of safety, there was no significant difference between the groups in daytime sleepiness and concentration impairment, which are the most worrisome adverse events induced by olanzapine. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that antiemetic regimens consisting of olanzapine, 5HT3RA, and DEX without NK1RA may be a treatment option for patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Correlations of mRNA Levels among Efflux Transporters, Transcriptional Regulators, and Scaffold Proteins in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Multidrug resistance (MDR) due to enhanced drug efflux activity of tumor cells can severely impact the efficacy of antitumor therapies. We recently showed that increased activity of the efflux transporter P-glycoprotein (P-gp) associated with activation of Snail transcriptional regulators may be mediated mainly by moesin in lung cancer cells. Here, we aimed to systematically evaluate the relationships among mRNA expression levels of efflux transporters (P-gp, breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and multidrug resistance-associated protein 2 (MRP2)), scaffold proteins (ezrin (Ezr), radixin (Rdx), and moesin (Msn); ERM proteins), and SNAI family members (Snail, Slug, and Smac) in clinical lung cancer and noncancer samples. We found high correlations between relative (cancer/noncancer) mRNA expression levels of Snail and Msn, Msn and P-gp, Slug and MRP2, and Smuc and BCRP. These findings support our previous conclusion that Snail regulates P-gp activity via Msn and further suggest that Slug and Smuc may contribute to the functional regulation of MRP2 and BCRP, respectively, in lung cancer cells. This trial is registered with UMIN000023923.

Real-World Patient Characteristics and Treatment Patterns of Naldemedine for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Chart Review Study.

Background and Objectives: Naldemedine is a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist that improves opioid-induced constipation. Although clinical trials have excluded patients with poor performance status (PS) and those started on naldemedine early after opioid initiation, clinical practice has used naldemedine for the same patients. Therefore, we investigated the treatment patterns of naldemedine in a real-world setting. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective chart review study of opioid-treated patients with cancer receiving naldemedine. Adverse events that occurred within 7 days of naldemedine initiation were evaluated in those who received one or more doses of the same. Effectiveness was assessed in patients who used naldemedine for more than 7 days. Results: A total of 296 patients satisfied the eligibility criteria, among whom 129 (43.6%) had a PS of ≥3 and 176 (59.5%) started naldemedine within 2 weeks of opioid initiation. Moreover, 203 (79.6%) patients had ≥3 bowel movements per week. Incidences of all grades of diarrhea and abdominal pain were 87 (29.4%) and 12 (4.1%), respectively. No patient had grade 4 or higher adverse events. Conclusions: Although nearly half of the patients receiving naldemedine in clinical practice belonged to populations that were not included in the clinical trials, our results suggested that naldemedine in clinical practice had the same efficacy and safety as that in clinical trials.

Effects of Sex and Seasonal Climatic Changes on the Risk of Incidence of Anti-EGFR Therapy-Induced Rash in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Background and Objectives: Seasonal climatic changes may affect the development of the rash that is characteristic of treatment with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies. We evaluated the association between seasons and rash incidence among patients with cancer. Materials and Methods: Data from patients with colorectal or head and neck cancer treated with cetuximab or panitumumab during summer (S group; n = 34) or winter (W group; n = 37) between June 2014 and February 2019 were collected to retrospectively examine patient characteristics and rash incidence ≤ 8 weeks after treatment initiation. Results: Rashes were observed in 73.5% (n = 25) and 78.4% (n = 29) and grade 3 rashes were observed in 17.6% (n = 6) and 2.7% (n = 1) of the patients in the S and W groups, respectively. The incidence of grade ≥ 2 rashes in males in the S group was higher than that in the rest of the patient groups (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The higher incidence of skin rashes in males during summer might be attributed to the effects of ultraviolet light, lack of skincare, male hormones, and secretion of anti-EGFR antibodies in sweat. These findings highlight the need for research on preventive measures for such rashes.

Efficacy and safety of 5 mg olanzapine for nausea and vomiting management in cancer patients receiving carboplatin: integrated study of three prospective multicenter phase II trials.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of olanzapine as an antiemetic agent in cancer chemotherapy has been demonstrated. However, few high-quality reports are available on the evaluation of olanzapine's efficacy and safety at a low dose of 5 mg among patients treated with carboplatin regimens. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of 5 mg olanzapine for managing nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving carboplatin regimens and identified patient-related risk factors for carboplatin regimen-induced nausea and vomiting treated with 5 mg olanzapine. METHODS: Data were pooled for 140 patients from three multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for managing nausea and vomiting induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the patient-related risk factors. RESULTS: Regarding the endpoints of carboplatin regimen-induced nausea and vomiting control, the complete response, complete control, and total control rates during the overall study period were 87.9, 86.4, and 72.9%, respectively. No treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed. The multivariable logistic regression models revealed that only younger age was significantly associated with an increased risk of non-total control. Surprisingly, there was no significant difference in CINV control between the patients treated with or without neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that antiemetic regimens containing low-dose (5 mg) olanzapine could be effective and safe for patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Low-Dose Olanzapine Plus Granisetron and Dexamethasone for Carboplatin-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Thoracic Malignancies: A Prospective Multicenter Phase II Trial.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is an inexpensive and durable agent for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and is also superior to neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists in the control of nausea. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a low dose of 5 mg olanzapine plus granisetron and dexamethasone for treatment of carboplatin (CBDCA)-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with thoracic malignancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial in four centers in Japan. Registered patients were scheduled to receive area under the curve (AUC) ≥5 mg/mL per minute of CBDCA and had never received moderately to highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Patients received olanzapine 5 mg/day orally after supper for 4 days, in combination with granisetron and dexamethasone. Primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no emesis and no use of rescue medication) rate during the overall phase (0-120 hours). RESULTS: Between February 2018 and June 2020, 51 patients were enrolled, and 50 patients were evaluated. The CR rates in the overall (0-120 hours), acute (0-24 hours), and delayed phases (24-120 hours) were 94.0%, 100%, and 94.0%, respectively. No grade 3 or higher adverse effects of olanzapine were observed. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic antiemetic therapy with a low dose of 5 mg olanzapine plus granisetron and dexamethasone showed durable efficacy with an acceptable safety profile. This three-drug combination appears to be a reasonable treatment approach in patients with thoracic malignancies receiving an AUC ≥5 mg/mL per minute of CBDCA-based regimen. Clinical trial identification number: UMIN000031267. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this phase II trial indicated that the prophylactic administration of low-dose of 5 mg olanzapine combined with granisetron and dexamethasone has promising activity with acceptable safety profile in patients with thoracic malignancy receiving high-dose carboplatin chemotherapy.

Moesin-Mediated P-Glycoprotein Activation During Snail-Induced Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Lung Cancer Cells.

Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) plays a role in not only cancer metastasis, but also drug resistance, which is associated with increased levels of efflux transporters such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Here, we examined whether P-gp activation during Snail-induced EMT of lung cancer cells is mediated by ezrin, radixin, and moesin (ERM), which regulate transporter localization. HCC827 lung cancer cells overexpressing the transcription factor Snail showed increased Rhodamine123 efflux and increased paclitaxel resistance, reflecting increased P-gp activity. Concomitantly, the expression level of moesin, but not ezrin or radixin, was significantly increased. The increase of P-gp activity was suppressed by knockdown of moesin. Thus, the increase of P-gp activity associated with Snail-induced EMT may be mediated mainly by moesin in HCC827 cells. On the other hand, the Snail mRNA expression level was correlated with the expression level of each ERM in 4 non-small-cell lung cancer cell lines (HCC827, A549, H441, H1975) and in tumor tissues, but not normal tissues, of patients with lung cancer. These results suggest that P-gp activation during EMT is at least partially due to increased expression of moesin. Coadministration of moesin inhibitors with anticancer drugs might block P-gp-mediated drug efflux organ-specifically, improving treatment efficacy and minimizing side effects on other organs.