A multicenter phase II trial of the triplet antiemetic therapy with palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine for a cisplatin-containing regimen. - PATROL-I.

Dexamethasone is one of the key antiemetic agents and is widely used even now. However, dexamethasone has been associated with several adverse reactions even after short-term administration. Therefore, developing a steroid-free antiemetic regimen is an important issue to consider. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine in a multi-institutional phase II study. Chemotherapy-naive patients scheduled to receive cisplatin were enrolled and evaluated for the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during 120 h after chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of the study was total control (TC) in the overall phase. The key secondary endpoint was complete response (CR), which was assessed in the acute, delayed, and overall phase, respectively. Adverse events were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Eighty-five patients were enrolled from 8 centers in Japan, of which 83 were evaluable for analyses. The percentage of patients who achieved TC during the overall phase was 31.3%. CR was achieved in 61.4%, 84.3%, and 65.1% of patients during the overall, acute, and delayed phases, respectively. The most frequently reported adverse event was anorexia. The primary endpoint was below the threshold and we could not find benefit in the dexamethasone-free regimen, but CR during the overall phase was similar to that of the conventional three-drug regimen. This antiemetic regimen without dexamethasone might be an option for patients for whom corticosteroids should not be an active application.

Effectiveness of Palonosetron, 1-Day Dexamethasone, and Aprepitant in Patients Undergoing Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing strategy with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5HT3RA) and aprepitant (APR), as triplet antiemetic prophylaxis, is associated with poor control of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving carboplatin (CBDCA)-based chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate whether using palonosetron (PALO) as a 5HT3RA provides superior control with CINV than first-generation (1st) 5HT3RA in triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with a DEX-sparing strategy. METHODS: Pooled patient-level data from a nationwide, multicenter, and prospective observational study were analyzed to compare the incidence of CINV between patients administered PALO and 1st 5HT3RA in combination with 1-day DEX and APR. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in the incidence of CINV, pattern of CINV, or severity of nausea by type of 5HT3RA in triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with DEX-sparing strategy. In both groups, the incidence of nausea gradually increased from day 3, peaked on day 4 or 5, and then declined slowly. The visual analog scale scores in the delayed phase remained high throughout the 7-day observation period. CONCLUSION: Careful patient selection and symptom monitoring are needed when implementing the DEX-sparing strategy in triplet antiemetic prophylaxis for patients undergoing CBDCA-based chemotherapy. Furthermore, additional strategies may be needed to achieve better control of delayed CINV.

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.

Assisted Living and Medication Adherence in Super-aged Patients With Heart Failure in the Japanese Population.

ABSTRACT: Poor adherence to medication in patients with heart failure (HF) is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Although social support has been reported to improve medication adherence in patients with HF, the detailed underlying mechanism of this association is unclear. This study investigated appropriate social support types to ensure medication adherence, as well as patient characteristics that benefit from such social support in patients with HF. This was a retrospective observational study investigating the association of social support with medication adherence in 824 patients with HF who were registered in a prospective multicenter database. First, we analyzed the association between social support types and poor medication adherence leading to hospitalization. An interaction analysis was performed to detect patients' characteristics that benefited most from social support in terms of medical adherence. Fifty patients (6.1%) were hospitalized for poor adherence to medications. Multivariable analysis revealed that not receiving assisted living, which was defined as having supporting individuals at least once a week, was independently associated with poor medication adherence-related hospitalization. An interaction analysis revealed that patients with dementia benefited from assisted living significantly, whereas male patients or current smokers did not. Summarily, assisted living at least once a week was appropriate for improving medication adherence in patients with HF and was particularly effective in patients with dementia. Performed in a super-aging region in Japan, this study may also suggest the relevance of social support in preventing HF exacerbation in other developed countries that will experience an aging society in the near future.

Preventive effect of 20 mEq and 8 mEq magnesium supplementation on cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity: a propensity score-matched analysis.

PURPOSE: The protective effect of magnesium (Mg) supplementation against cisplatin (CDDP)-induced nephrotoxicity has been widely described; however, the optimal dose of Mg supplementation is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether 20 mEq of Mg supplementation is more effective than 8 mEq Mg in preventing CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity, as well as the associated risk factors, in cancer patients treated with CDDP-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Pooled data of 272 patients receiving 20 mEq or 8 mEq Mg supplementation to CDDP-based chemotherapy from a multicenter, retrospective, observational study were compared using propensity score matching. Separate multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify the risk factors for renal failure induced by each treatment dose. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the incidence of nephrotoxicity between the 8 mEq and 20 mEq groups (P = 0.926). There was also no significant difference in the severity of nephrotoxicity, elevated serum creatinine levels, and decreased estimated creatinine clearance levels between the two groups. Cardiac disease and albumin levels were identified as independent risk factors for CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity. CONCLUSION: We did not find an advantage of 20 mEq over 8 mEq Mg supplementation in terms of a preventive effect against CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity. The optimal dose of Mg supplementation for the prevention of CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity remains unknown, and further studies are warranted.

5HT3 RA plus dexamethasone plus aprepitant for controlling delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in colorectal cancer.

Delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is not well controlled in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing oxaliplatin (L-OHP)-based chemotherapy. Whether neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist addition to a first-generation 5HT3 antagonist (1st 5-HT3 RA) and dexamethasone (DEX) is beneficial to these patients remains controversial. Furthermore, whether palonosetron (PALO) or aprepitant (APR) is more effective in controlling delayed CINV is unclear. We, therefore, investigated whether PALO+DEX or 1st 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR was more effective in controlling delayed CINV, and the risk factors for delayed CINV, in CRC patients undergoing L-OHP-based chemotherapy. Data were pooled from two prospective observational Japanese studies and a phase III trial to compare CINV incidence between the PALO + DEX (PALO) and 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR (APR) groups by propensity score-matched analysis. CINV risk factors were identified using logistic regression models. The CINV incidence was higher in the PALO group than in the APR group. Logistic regression analysis revealed alcohol consumption, motion sickness, and the PALO+DEX regimen as independent risk factors for delayed nausea, and female sex and the PALO+DEX regimen as those for delayed vomiting. Compared with prophylactic PALO + DEX, 1st 5-HT3 RA+DEX+APR was more effective in controlling delayed CINV. Thus, CRC patients receiving L-OHP-based chemotherapy should be treated with three antiemetics, including APR.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with carboplatin plus pemetrexed or carboplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with lung cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lung cancer who are treated with carboplatin-based chemotherapy regimens often experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, knowledge on the effect of regimen and cofactors on the risk of CINV is limited. This study aimed to analyze and compare the incidence of CINV between lung cancer patients undergoing carboplatin plus pemetrexed (CBDCA+PEM) and those undergoing carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CBDCA+PTX) chemotherapy. METHODS: Pooled data of 240 patients from two prospective observational studies were compared using propensity score matching. Separate multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for nausea and vomiting following chemotherapy. RESULTS: Delayed nausea was significantly more common in patients treated with CBDCA+PEM than in those treated with CBDCA+PTX (51.1% vs. 36.2%, P = 0.04), but the incidence of vomiting did not significantly differ between the two groups (23.4% vs. 14.9%, P = 0.14). The occurrence of CINV peaked on day 4 in the CBDCA+PTX group and on day 5 in the CBDCA+PEM group. Multivariate analysis showed that female sex, younger age, and CBDCA+PEM regimen were independent risk factors for delayed nausea, while female sex was an independent risk factor for delayed vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: The CBDCA + PEM regimen has a higher risk of causing delayed nausea than the CBDCA + PTX regimen, and aggressive antiemetic prophylaxis should be offered to patients treated with CBDCA + PEM.

Pooled analysis of combination antiemetic therapy for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with colorectal cancer treated with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy of moderate emetic risk.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with oxaliplatin (L-OHP)-based chemotherapy, delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) have not been well controlled. METHODS: We pooled data from two prospective observational studies in Japan and one phase III clinical trial to assess whether delayed CINV could be controlled with a combination of three antiemetics adding a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist and identified individual risk factors, using an inverse probability treatment-weighted analysis. RESULTS: A total of 661 patients were evaluable in this study (median age: 64 years; 391 male, and 270 female). 3 antiemetics controlled delayed nausea (33.18% vs. 42.25%; p = 0.0510) and vomiting (4.15% vs. 16.08%; p < 0.0001) better than with 2 antiemetics. Female and 2 antiemetics were risk factors for both delayed nausea (female-odds ratio [OR]: 1.918; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.292-2.848; p = 0.0012; 2 antiemetics-OR: 1.485; 95% CI: 1.000-2.204; p = 0.0498) and delayed vomiting (female-OR: 2.735; 95% CI: 1.410-5.304; p = 0.0029; 2 antiemetics-OR: 4.551; 95% CI: 2.116-9.785; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Identifying individual risk factors can facilitate personalized treatments for delayed CINV. We recommend a 3-antiemetic combination prophylaxis for CRC patients treated with L-OHP-based chemotherapy, especially for female patients.

Efficacy of one-day versus multiple-day dexamethasone for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in lung cancer patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

PURPOSE: Dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing strategies (one-day DEX) with palonosetron as doublet antiemetic prophylaxis have previously been studied. However, DEX-sparing regimens with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) and aprepitant (APR), as triplet antiemetic prophylaxis, have not been evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a combination of 5-HT3RA, APR, and DEX on day 1 of carboplatin (CBDCA)-based chemotherapy in patients with lung cancer. METHODS: Data were pooled from a nationwide, multicenter, prospective observational study using propensity score-matched analysis to compare the incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) between one- and multiple-day DEX regimens in combination with 5-HT3RA plus APR. RESULTS: Incidence of delayed nausea was significantly higher in the one-day than in the multiple-day DEX group. Incidence of nausea was also significantly higher in the one-day than in the multiple-day DEX group on days 3-5. Kaplan-Meier curves for nausea showed a significant difference between the two groups; however, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of vomiting or the Kaplan-Meier curves of time to vomiting. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate the efficacy of a DEX-sparing regimen by comparing one- and multiple-day DEX combined with 5-HT3RA and APR concerning CINV incidence in lung cancer patients receiving CBDCA-based chemotherapy. Antiemetic regimens of one-day DEX result in poor control of delayed nausea; therefore, we recommend the application of the DEX-sparing strategy only after careful patient selection while considering the development of nausea.

A Nationwide, Multicenter Registry Study of Antiemesis for Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Japan.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported the results of a prospective study of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in a cohort of patients who received carboplatin-based chemotherapy and were selected from a nationwide registry of those scheduled for moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) by the CINV Study Group of Japan. Of 1,910 previously registered patients (HEC: 1,195; MEC: 715), 400 patients received carboplatin-based chemotherapy. The frequency of CINV was determined, and the risk factors for CINV were assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CINV data were collected from 7-day diaries. Risk factors for CINV were identified using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 400 patients scheduled for carboplatin-based chemotherapy, 267 patients received two antiemetics (5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist [5-HT3 RA] and dexamethasone [DEX]), 118 patients received three antiemetics (5-HT3 RA, DEX, and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist [NK1 RA]), and 15 were nonadherent to the treatment. In these patients, the CINV overall, acute, and delayed phase rates of complete response (CR), defined as no vomiting with no rescue medication, were 67.0%, 98.2%, and 67.5%, respectively. The rates of no nausea were 55.6%, 94.0%, and 56.1%, respectively, and those of no vomiting were 81.3%, 99.0%, and 81.8%, respectively. Older age was associated with a decreased non-CR, whereas female sex, history of pregnancy-related emesis, and dual antiemetic therapy were associated with an increased non-CR during the overall period. CONCLUSION: In a clinical practice setting, in patients who received carboplatin-based chemotherapy, adherence is quite high and appropriate antiemetic prophylaxis requires a triple antiemetic regimen including NK1 RA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: For patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy, triple antiemetic therapy with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist should be given prophylactically regardless of risk factor status.

Effect of lubiprostone on vinca alkaloid-induced constipation in patients with hematological malignancies: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Patients receiving vinca alkaloids for hematological malignancies frequently experience constipation that is unresponsive to laxatives. Research on treatment of vinca alkaloid-induced constipation is limited. This study aimed to determine whether the chloride channel activator lubiprostone ameliorates vinca alkaloid-induced constipation in patients with hematological malignancies. In this retrospective cohort study, vinca alkaloid-induced constipation (grade ≥ 3 using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) was investigated in patients treated for hematological malignancies between July 2014 and June 2019 who had already been prescribed osmotic laxatives and additionally received either a stimulant laxative or lubiprostone. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for persistent constipation after introduction of the second laxative. A propensity score model was used to match 67 patients taking a stimulant laxative and 67 treated with lubiprostone, and the occurrence of intractable constipation was compared between groups. Overall, 203 patients were included, among whom 50 (25%) had constipation. On multivariate analysis, body mass index, opioid use, and addition of lubiprostone were independently associated with constipation. Patients treated with lubiprostone were significantly less likely to experience intractable constipation than did those treated with stimulant laxatives (10% vs. 34%, P = 0.002). Moreover, post-constipation diarrhea was significantly less frequent among patients treated with lubiprostone (42% vs. 63%, P = 0.024). Lubiprostone was more effective than stimulant laxatives at treating vinca alkaloid-induced intractable constipation in patients with hematological malignancies, and its use could enable safe vinca alkaloid chemotherapy.

[How Should We Design, Conduct, Evaluate, and Apply Clinical Study in a Clinical Setting].

The palliative care, methodologies, and evaluation methods of clinical study for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting( CINV)are not defined well. In addition, it is important to consider that individualized antiemetic therapy should be treated according to each patient's risk factors as well as the emetogenicity of chemotherapy regimens. While the CTCAE is being widely used by medical staff in clinical practice for the evaluation of CINV, the patient-reported outcome(PRO)is also considered as an important method of assessment. In this article, we describe matters to consider during the process of designing, evaluating, and applying in a clinical setting for CINV study. Based on "Supportive care and policy of palliative care CINV" which is going to be published, we expect that clinical study designs would be optimized to accelerate the establishment of evidence by utilizing not only randomized controlled trial(RCT), but also real world data(RWD).

Genetic risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Younger age and female sex have already been well-known risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and 30-50% of cancer patients still suffer from CINV. Genetic polymorphisms are suggested to influence antiemetic treatment response. METHODS: This study included a subset of patients previously enrolled in a randomised controlled trial; 156 patients were evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the role of pharmacogenomic polymorphisms relevant to antiemetic response in patients with cancer receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The study's efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with complete response (CR). The study endpoint was evaluated separately in the acute (CR0-24) and delayed (CR24-120) phases. Thirteen polymorphisms were genotyped, and the association of these genotypes with the efficacy of prophylactic antiemetics was then investigated. Confounding variables for the CR were identified using stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis. Age and sex were included as independent variables by the forced-entry method, and the stepwise method was used to select the pharmacogenomic factors for inclusion as independent variables. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the ERCC1 8092AA (odds ratio [OR] = 11.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74-72.71; p = 0.011) and female sex (OR = 3.63; 95% CI 1.14-11.58; p = 0.029) were significant predictors of CR0-24. No significant association of CR24-120 with pharmacogenomic polymorphisms was found via multivariate logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: ERCC1 polymorphism influenced the extent of CINV control in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial information: UMIN 000009335.

A prospective, observational, multicenter study on risk factors and prophylaxis for low emetic risk chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: The incidence of and the risk factors for nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing low emetic risk chemotherapy (LEC) are unclear. The aim of the study was to provide information on these topics by performing a multicenter, observational, prospective study. METHODS: The study consisted of patients who were administered first-time LEC that was consistent or inconsistent with current guidelines. Using the visual analog scale, patients recorded their daily food intake and the occurrence and severity of nausea over a 5-day treatment period. RESULTS: The overall incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting did not differ significantly between patients undergoing guideline-consistent (n = 89) or guideline-inconsistent (n = 121) prophylaxis (30.3 vs. 22.3%, respectively; P = 0.19). Logistic regression analysis identified a history of nausea and LEC other than taxanes as independent risk factors associated with nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing LEC. The mean daily visual analog scale scores for nausea severity and a decrease in food intake were <25 mm throughout the entire observation period. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-consistent prophylaxis appeared to control nausea and vomiting effectively in patients undergoing LEC. However, patients with a history of nausea and receiving LEC other than taxanes should be carefully observed and treatment should be adjusted according to their symptoms.

Comparison of preventive effects of combined furosemide and mannitol versus single diuretics, furosemide or mannitol, on cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity.

Cisplatin (CDDP)-induced nephrotoxicity is a common dose-limiting toxicity, and diuretics are often administered to prevent nephrotoxicity. However, the efficacy and optimal administration of diuretics in preventing CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity remain to be established. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of combining furosemide and mannitol to prevent CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity. This was a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from a multicenter, retrospective, observational study, including 396 patients who received one or two diuretics for CDDP-based chemotherapy, compared using propensity score matching. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for nephrotoxicity. There was no significant difference in the incidence of nephrotoxicity between the two groups (22.2% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.416). Hypertension, CDDP dose ≥ 75 mg/m2, and no magnesium supplementation were identified as risk factors for nephrotoxicity, whereas the use of diuretics was not found to be a risk factor. The combination of furosemide and mannitol showed no advantage over a single diuretic in preventing CDDP-induced nephrotoxicity. The renal function of patients receiving CDDP-based chemotherapy (≥ 75 mg/m2) and that of those with hypertension should be carefully monitored. Magnesium supplementation is important for these patients.

Assessing the ability of the Cancer and Aging Research Group tool to predict chemotherapy toxicity in older Japanese patients: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) prediction tool was designed in the United States to predict grade ≥ 3 chemotherapy-related adverse events (CRAE) in older patients. However, its usefulness among Japanese people, who have different sensitivities to anticancer drugs and life expectancy, remains unknown. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the utility of the CARG tool for predicting severe CRAE in older Japanese patients with cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumors aged 65 years and older who commenced anticancer drug regimens from April 2018 to October 2020 were divided into three groups (low, medium, and high-risk) based on their CARG risk scores. Toxicity was prospectively observed by a pharmacist. The primary objective was to evaluate the correlation between the incidence of grade ≥ 3 CRAE and the CARG risk score. The secondary objective was to evaluate hematological and non-hematological toxicities. CRAE incidence was compared among the three groups using a closed testing procedure: (1) Cochran-Armitage test for trend and (2) chi-square test for paired comparison. RESULTS: The patients (N = 165) had a median age of 71 years (range: 65-89 years). CRAE in patients divided into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, based on CARG risk scores, were 39%, 55%, and 82%, respectively (low vs high; p < 0.001, medium vs high; p < 0.01). The incidence of severe hematologic toxicity was 37%, 35%, and 50% in the low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, respectively; the incidence of severe non-hematologic toxicity was 15%, 36%, and 65%, respectively (low vs medium; p < 0.01, low vs high; p < 0.001, and medium vs high; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective observational study to validate the CARG prediction tool in older Japanese patients with cancer. The CARG risk score may be effective in predicting the development of non-hematologic toxicities. These results should be considered when administering chemotherapy to older Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors.

Effects of renin-angiotensin system inhibitor and beta-blocker use on mortality in older patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Japan.

Introduction: Guideline-directed medical therapy with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors and beta-blockers has improved the survival of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, it is unclear whether RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers can be administered to older patients with HF. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effects of beta-blockers and RAS inhibitors on the prognosis of older patients with HFrEF. Methods: Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data from 1,061 patients with acute decompensated HF, enrolled in the Kochi Registry of Subjects with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (Kochi YOSACOI study), were analyzed to assess their impact on mortality. Additionally, a machine learning approach was applied to complement the conventional statistical model for analysis. Patients with HFrEF (n = 314) were divided into the all-cause mortality within 2 years group (n = 80) and the survivor group (n = 234). Results: Overall, 41.1% (129/314) of the patients were aged ≥80, and 25.5% (80/314) experienced all-cause mortality within 2 years. Furthermore, 57.6% (181/314) and 79.0% (248/314) were prescribed RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers, respectively. Our analysis showed that RAS inhibitor use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality and cardiac death in patients with HFrEF of all ages (P < 0.001), and beta-blocker use had an interaction with age. Machine learning revealed that the use of beta-blockers altered the risk of mortality, with a threshold of approximately 80 years of age. Beta-blocker use was associated with lower all-cause mortality and cardiac death in patients with HFrEF aged <80 years (P < 0.001) but not in those aged ≥80 years (P = 0.319 and P = 0.246, respectively). These results suggest that beta blockers may differ in their all-cause mortality benefits according to age. Conclusions: RAS inhibitors prevented all-cause mortality and cardiac death at all ages, whereas beta-blockers had different effects depending on the patient's age. This study suggested that the choice of beta-blockers and RAS inhibitors is more important in older patients with HFrEF than in younger patients with the same condition.

Efficacy of 3-day versus 5-day aprepitant regimens for long-delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is an ongoing problem. While effectiveness of triplet antiemetic regimens in the delayed CINV phase (24-120 hours after administration of chemotherapy) has been studied, their effectiveness in the long-delayed phase (120-168 hours post-administration) is unknown. We compared the efficacy of 3- and 5-day courses of a triplet antiemetic prophylaxis containing aprepitant (APR) in controlling long-delayed CINV after cisplatin (CDDP)-based chemotherapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We obtained patient-level data from a nationwide, multicenter, prospective observational study in Japan. The incidence and timing of CINV after 3- and 5-day APR-containing regimens were compared using inverse probability treatment weighting. RESULTS: The analysis included 380 patients. The incidence rates of long-delayed nausea and vomiting were significantly reduced for the 5-day compared with the 3-day regimen (29.1% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.0042; 6.7% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001, respectively). Among those without CINV, vomiting was not reported after day 2 in the 5-day APR group but increased after day 4 in the 3-day APR group. CONCLUSION: A 5-day regimen triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with APR decreased long-delayed vomiting compared with a 3-day regimen in patients receiving CDDP-based chemotherapy. However, the 5-day regimen showed no advantage over the 3-day regimen against long-delayed nausea.

Adrenaline-resistant anaphylactic shock caused by contrast medium in a patient after risperidone overdose: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, the use of risperidone in combination with adrenaline is contraindicated, except in cases of anaphylaxis. Therefore, there is limited clinical evidence regarding the interaction of these two drugs. Here, we report the clinical course of a case of adrenaline-resistant anaphylactic shock induced by a contrast medium injection after a risperidone overdose. CASE PRESENTATION: A man in his 30s was transported to our hospital after attempting suicide by taking 10 mg of risperidone and jumping from a height of 10 m. To determine the location and severity of his injuries, he was injected with an iodinated contrast medium, after which he developed generalized erythema and hypotension and was diagnosed with anaphylactic shock. A 0.5 mg dose of adrenaline was administered with no improvement, followed by another 0.5 mg dose that did not change his blood pressure. After infusion of a sodium bicarbonate solution (8.4%), administration of fresh frozen plasma, and additional administration of adrenaline (0.6-1.2 µg/min), his blood pressure improved, and he recovered from the anaphylactic shock. CONCLUSIONS: This was a rare case of a risperidone overdose followed by adrenaline-resistant anaphylactic shock. The resistance is likely associated with the high blood concentration of risperidone. Our findings indicate that the potential for decreased adrenergic responsiveness should be considered in patients undergoing risperidone treatment in the event of anaphylactic shock.

Implementation of institutional antiemetic guidelines for low emetic risk chemotherapy with docetaxel: a clinical and cost evaluation.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to evaluate the effect of implementation of institutional guidelines for low emetic risk chemotherapy with docetaxel and estimate the cost saving for all low emetic risk chemotherapies. METHODS: We examined the clinical effect of preparing and implementing institutional antiemetic guidelines for the breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant docetaxel therapy. Although the antiemetic medication for such patients used to be ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg (OND + DEX), it was changed to dexamethasone (DEX) 12 mg alone after implementation of the institutional guidelines. The effectiveness and adverse effects of DEX alone (56 patients, 205 courses) were compared with those of OND + DEX (41 patients, 151 courses). The cost saving was calculated from the antiemetic costs in both groups. The annual cost saving was estimated from the number of all low emetic risk chemotherapies in a year. RESULTS: The incidences of nausea (19.5% versus 16.1%), vomiting (2.4% versus 0%), constipation (34.1% versus 30.4%), and insomnia (17.1% versus 17.9%) were not significantly different between the OND + DEX group and DEX alone group. In all low emetic risk chemotherapies, US $78,883 of potential cost saving was estimated in the first year after changing the antiemetic treatment. CONCLUSION: The present results suggest that DEX alone is equally effective for preventing nausea and vomiting and less expensive compared with a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist plus DEX in low emetic risk chemotherapy with docetaxel.