Early recognition of malnutrition and cachexia in the cancer patient: a position paper of a European School of Oncology Task Force.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss and cachexia are common, reduce tolerance of cancer treatment and the likelihood of response, and independently predict poor outcome. METHODS: A group of experts met under the auspices of the European School of Oncology to review the literature and-on the basis of the limited evidence at present-make recommendations for malnutrition and cachexia management and future research. CONCLUSIONS: Our focus should move from end-stage wasting to supporting patients' nutritional and functional state throughout the increasingly complex and prolonged course of anti-cancer treatment. When inadequate nutrient intake predominates (malnutrition), this can be managed by conventional nutritional support. In the presence of systemic inflammation/altered metabolism (cachexia), a multi-modal approach including novel therapeutic agents is required. For all patients, oncologists should consider three supportive care issues: ensuring sufficient energy and protein intake, maintaining physical activity to maintain muscle mass and (if present) reducing systemic inflammation. The results of phase II/III trials based on novel drug targets (e.g. cytokines, ghrelin receptor, androgen receptor, myostatin) are expected in the next 2 years. If effective therapies emerge, early detection of malnutrition and cachexia will be increasingly important in the hope that timely intervention can improve both patient-centered and oncology outcomes.

Randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging trial of the oral neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist casopitant mesylate for the prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND: Casopitant mesylate is a novel, oral neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist with demonstrated antiemetic efficacy. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled phase II trial to evaluate three casopitant doses as part of a triple-therapy regimen for the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose cisplatin. The aim of the study was to detect a dose response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 493 patients with solid tumors receiving a first cycle of cisplatin > or =70 mg/m(2) were randomly assigned among six treatment arms. The primary analysis compared a control arm [ondansetron/dexamethasone (Ond/Dex)] with three investigational treatments (Ond/Dex plus oral casopitant 50, 100, or 150 mg administered daily for 3 days). Two exploratory arms were included: one evaluating a single oral casopitant dose of 150 mg added to standard Ond/Dex and another with 3-day oral aprepitant-based therapy (Ond/Dex plus aprepitant 125 mg day 1, 80 mg days 2-3). RESULTS: The complete response (CR) rate (defined as no vomiting, retching, rescue therapy, or premature discontinuation) was significantly increased in each casopitant arm relative to control over the 120-h evaluation period: 76% (50 mg), 86% (100 mg), 77% (150 mg), and 60% with control (P = 0.0036). The CR rate for the single oral dose regimen was similar to the CR rate reported for the 3-day regimens. No differences were observed in the incidence of nausea or significant nausea among groups in the primary analysis. The most common adverse events related to treatment included headache (n = 10) and hiccups (n = 14). CONCLUSION: All doses of oral casopitant as a 3-day regimen (and likely as a 150-mg single oral dose) in combination with Ond/Dex provided significant improvement in the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis.

Oral metoclopramide with or without diphenhydramine: potential for prevention of late nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin.

Late nausea and vomiting lasting 2-7 days occurs in 20%-68% of patients receiving cisplatin. We therefore studied the effects of oral metoclopramide given at doses of 20, 50, or 100 mg four times a day for 25 doses (7 days) beginning after cisplatin to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for prophylactic oral antiemetic regimens. Patients were stratified into younger (less than or equal to 30 yr old) and older (greater than 30 yr old) groups. Dose escalation was performed without or with concomitant oral diphenhydramine. For the younger group, the MTD for metoclopramide without diphenhydramine was less than 20 mg, and the MTD with diphenhydramine was 20 mg. For the older group, the MTD without diphenhydramine was 20 mg, and the MTD with diphenhydramine was 50 mg. Extrapyramidal reactions in the younger group and agitated depression in the older group were the major dose-terminating toxic effects. Patient acceptance of these regimens was excellent.

Phase I study of (6R)-5,10-dideazatetrahydrofolate: a folate antimetabolite inhibitory to de novo purine synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer chemotherapy with folate antimetabolites has been traditionally targeted at the enzyme dihydrofolate reductase and is based on the requirement of dividing tumor cells for a supply of thymidylate and purines. However, a new compound, 5,10-dideazatetrahydrofolate (DDATHF, whose 6R diastereomer is also known as Lometrexol), has become available that prevents tumor cell growth by inhibiting the first of the folate-dependent enzymes involved in de novo purine synthesis, glycinamide ribonucleotide formyltransferase. PURPOSE: We investigated the toxicity and therapeutic activity of DDATHF in a phase I clinical trial. METHODS: DDATHF was given at one of the following dose levels to 33 patients (16 females and 17 males) with malignant solid tumors: 3.0 mg/m2 per week (level A) to 10 patients, 4.5 mg/m2 per week (level B) to 13 patients, or 6.0 mg/m2 per week (level C) to 10 patients. Each drug cycle consisted of three weekly injections of DDATHF followed by a 2-week rest prior to redosing in the next cycle. RESULTS: Of 33 patients, 27 received at least one full cycle of DDATHF. Thrombocytopenia was the major dose-limiting toxicity, and it was severe in one of 10 patients during the first cycle and in two of four patients during the second cycle. Because of cumulative toxicity at 6.0 mg/m2, second or later cycles were abbreviated to two weekly doses. Stomatitis was generally mild, but it was dose-limiting in one patient. Neutropenia was infrequent and mild, and normocytic anemia requiring blood transfusion was common with repeat dosing. Leucovorin was given for grade 2 or greater thrombocytopenia and resulted in hematologic recovery within 1 week in all eight patients so treated. Without leucovorin, the thrombocytopenia lasted from 7 to 49 days in three patients. A partial response was noted in one patient with non-small-cell lung cancer and a minor response in one patient with breast cancer. Three patients with colorectal cancer achieved stable disease for greater than 3 months with improvement in carcinoembryonic antigen levels in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: DDATHF has an unusual pattern of toxicity with repetitive dosing, and humans with advanced cancer are considerably more sensitive than would be predicted from previous animal studies. Although doses of 6.0 mg/m2 per week on our schedule have been determined to be safe, repeated cycles require careful monitoring because of cumulative toxic effects. IMPLICATIONS: Additional phase I studies of DDATHF that relate toxicity to folate intake and tissue folate pools appear warranted.

Phase I study of recombinant beta-interferon given by four-hour infusion.

Twelve patients with advanced malignant disease were entered onto a Phase I study of escalating doses of beta-interferon serine given by 4-h i.v. infusion twice a wk. Three patients each were entered at starting doses of 0.01, 1, 10, and 30 million units (MU)/m2. Doses escalation within individual patients was allowed to a maximum dose of 400 MU/m2. Fever, chills, fatigue, and acral cyanosis were commonly seen and increased in frequency at higher doses. Myalgia, nausea, diarrhea, headache, and confusion were seen at lesser frequencies. Mild leukopenia, paresthesia, infusion site erythema, and hypotension were each seen in one patient. No conventional maximal tolerated dose could be defined, since several patients underwent escalation to the highest allowable dose and seemed to develop tolerance to acute toxicities. However, a maximal starting dose of 10 MU/m2 was identified, such that those begun at this level or below tolerated semiweekly dose escalation, while those begun at 30 MU/m2 could not tolerate continued therapy. Detectable serum interferon levels were noted during treatment at 10 and 30 MU/m2, the levels at which significant toxicity also first appeared. A maximal starting dose of 10 MU/m2, with gradual escalation as tolerance to side effects develops, is suggested if therapy with high-dose beta-interferon serine is given by 4-h infusion.

Staphylococcal Protein A column: correlation of mitogenicity of perfused plasma with clinical response.

Eleven patients with advanced breast cancer and four with astrocytoma were treated with plasma perfused over columns containing staphylococcal Protein A (SPA). Doses of 5 to 20 mg of SPA were bound to collodion charcoal particles, and this treatment resulted in partial remissions in one patient with astrocytoma and in two patients with breast cancer. Remission duration was 6 wk to 6 mo. Resolution of lymphadenopathy and a decrease in carcinoembryonic antigen were noted in an additional two breast cancer patients. Systemic reactions to infused plasma consisted of fever, chills, and rigors. In brain cancer patients, increased intracranial pressure was also noted. A mitogenic substance was generated in plasma of 11 patients after it was perfused over the SPA charcoal matrix. The mitogenic material induced lymphoproliferation comparable to concanavalin A and required the presence of SPA on the collodion charcoal but was not due to leakage of SPA from the column during plasma perfusion. Of considerable significance was that only patients whose column perfused plasma contained this mitogenic activity exhibited systemic reactions, and five of these patients obtained antitumor responses. This striking correlation implies that the mitogenic factor is an active component of SPA therapy. The ability to demonstrate mitogenicity in column perfused plasma might also be useful for selecting patients amenable to SPA therapy. These findings attest to the therapeutic value of this mode of treatment and provide an initial definition of a mediator of SPA antitumor activity.

Dose ranging phase I study of the serotonin antagonist GR38032F for prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting.

GR38032F is a specific 5-HT3 (serotonin) receptor antagonist with antiemetic activity in animal and early human studies. We performed a dose-ranging phase I study of GR38032F in 43 evaluable patients receiving cisplatin 60 120 mg/m2 for the first time (38 of these patients were chemotherapy-naive). Intravenous GR38032F was administered over a dose range from 0.01 to 0.48 mg/kg given three times at four-hour intervals beginning one half hour before cisplatin, and patients were observed for 24 hours. An additional five patients were treated with 0.18 mg/kg given three times at six-hour intervals. Excellent antiemetic efficacy was noted, with 44% of patients experiencing no vomiting and 26% no nausea. Major protection from vomiting (less than or equal to 2 episodes) and from nausea (less than or equal to 2 hours) was experienced by 81% and 44%, respectively. Mild to moderate headache (40%), lightheadedness (21%), and elevated transaminase (19%) were the most common adverse events reported. One patient experienced an apparent hypersensitivity reaction that responded to conventional medications. No extrapyramidal reactions or akathisia were seen. GR38032F was effective through most of the dose range. However, efficacy decreased at the 0.01 mg/kg level and number and intensity of adverse events increased at the 0.48 mg/kg level. Analysis of those patients receiving high-dose cisplatin (100 to 120 mg/m2) revealed a positive association of GR38032F dose and antiemetic activity (Fisher's exact test, two-sided; P less than .05). The 5-HT3 receptor antagonists may provide antiemetic efficacy similar to high-dose metoclopramide without antidopaminergic toxicity. The maximum recommended dose on this schedule of GR38032F is 0.36 mg/kg.

Efficacy and safety of granisetron, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by high-dose cisplatin.

PURPOSE: To assess the antiemetic effects and safety profile of four different doses of granisetron (Kytril; SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals, Philadelphia, PA) when administered as a single intravenous (IV) dose for prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred eighty-four chemotherapy-naive patients receiving high-dose cisplatin (81 to 120 mg/m2) were randomized to receive one of four granisetron doses (5, 10, 20, or 40 micrograms/kg) administered before chemotherapy. Patients were observed on an inpatient basis for 18 to 24 hours, and vital signs, nausea, vomiting, retching, and appetite were assessed. Safety analyses included incidence of adverse experiences and laboratory parameter changes. RESULTS: After granisetron doses of 5, 10, 20, and 40 micrograms/kg, a major response (< or = two vomiting or retching episodes, and no antiemetic rescue) was recorded in 23%, 57%, 58%, and 60% of patients, respectively, and a complete response (no vomiting or retching, and no antiemetic rescue) in 18%, 41%, 40%, and 47% of patients, respectively. There was a statistically longer time to first episode of nausea (P = .0015) and vomiting (P = .0001), and fewer patients were administered additional antiemetic medication in the 10-micrograms/kg dosing groups than in the 5-micrograms/kg dosing group. As granisetron dose increased, appetite return increased (P = .040). Headache was the most frequently reported adverse event (20%). CONCLUSION: A single 10-, 20-, or 40-micrograms/kg dose of granisetron was effective in controlling vomiting in 57% to 60% of patients who received cisplatin at doses greater than 81 mg/m2 and totally prevented vomiting in 40% to 47% of patients. There were no statistically significant differences in efficacy between the 10-micrograms/kg dose and the 20- and 40-micrograms/kg doses. Granisetron was well tolerated at all doses.

Recombinant alfa interferon in renal cell carcinoma: a randomized trial of two routes of administration.

Ninety-seven patients with recurrent or metastatic renal cell carcinoma were randomized to receive recombinant interferon (IFN) alfa-2b (Intron A; Schering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ) by either the subcutaneous (SC) or intravenous (IV) route. The SC dosage was 2 X 10(6) IU/m2 three times weekly, and the IV dose 30 X 10(6) IU/m2 for five consecutive days every 3 weeks. Dose escalation to a maximum of 10 X 10(6) IU/m2 SC and 50 X 10(6) IU/m2 IV was allowed for patients with minimal or absent toxicity. Five of 51 of the SC-treated patients (10%) and three of 46 of the IV-treated patients (7%) had a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR). Patients with prior nephrectomy, no prior treatment, and lack of bone metastases were most likely to respond, and a retrospective analysis of this subgroup revealed a 23% response rate. Achievement of response took from 3 weeks to 11 months, while response duration lasted from 3 to 31+ months. All responders had prior nephrectomy; six of eight had no prior chemotherapy or hormonal therapy; five had lung metastases, and none had bone metastases. Regardless of route, almost all patients developed a flu-like syndrome; however, grade 3 or greater toxicity was much more common for IV-treated patients. This trial demonstrates modest, but definite antitumor activity for recombinant interferon in advanced renal cell carcinoma. SC administration with lower dose and toxicity is as effective as treatment administered IV.

Extended administration of oral etoposide and oral cyclophosphamide for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: We designed an all-oral regimen of etoposide and cyclophosphamide for use in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were chemotherapy-naive and had histologically confirmed assessable or measurable stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients received etoposide 50 mg/m2/d orally days 1 through 14 and cyclophosphamide 50 mg/m2/d orally days 1 through 14 every 28 days. Doses on later cycles were adjusted for myelosuppression. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients (64 eligible patients) received 192 cycles of oral extended etoposide/cyclophosphamide therapy (median, two cycles; range, zero to 15). Therapy was well tolerated with the mean dose per cycle being 104% of the originally scheduled dose. Two patients (3%) achieved a complete response and six (9%) achieved a partial response. Leukopenia, anemia, nausea/vomiting, and alopecia were the most common toxicities. Median survival was 6 months, and the 1-year survival rate was 25.6%, comparable to more intensive treatments. CONCLUSION: Oral extended etoposide/cyclophosphamide is a well-tolerated alternative for the treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer and can be used as a basis for the design of further outpatient regimens.

Proposal for classifying the acute emetogenicity of cancer chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To propose a classification of the acute emetogenicity of antineoplastic chemotherapy agents, and to develop an algorithm to define the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: A Medline search was conducted to identify (1) clinical trials that used chemotherapy as single-agent therapy, and (2) major reviews of antiemetic therapy. The search was limited to patients who received commonly used doses of chemotherapy agents, primarily by short (< 3 hours) intravenous infusions. Based on review of this information and our collective clinical experience, we assigned chemotherapy agents to one of five emetogenic levels by consensus. A preliminary algorithm to determine the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens was then designed by consensus. A final algorithm was developed after we analyzed a data base composed of patients treated on the placebo arms of four randomized antiemetic trials. RESULTS: Chemotherapy agents were divided into five levels: level 1 (< 10% of patients experience acute [< or = 24 hours after chemotherapy] emesis without antiemetic prophylaxis); level 2 (10% to 30%); level 3 (30% to 60%); level 4 (60% to 90%); and level 5 (> 90%). For combinations, the emetogenic level was determined by identifying the most emetogenic agent in the combination and then assessing the relative contribution of the other agents. The following rules apply: (1) level 1 agents do not contribute to the emetogenic level of a combination; (2) adding > or = one level 2 agent increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level greater than the most emetogenic agent in the combination; and (3) adding level 3 or 4 agents increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level per agent. CONCLUSION: The proposed classification schema provides a practical means to determine the emetogenic potential of individual chemotherapy agents and combination regimens during the 24 hours after administration. This system can serve as a framework for the development of antiemetic guidelines.

Comparison of the antiemetic effect of high-dose intravenous metoclopramide and high-dose intravenous haloperidol in a randomized double-blind crossover study.

Metoclopramide is an effective antiemetic for cisplatin-induced vomiting when given in parenteral high-dose regimens but not oral low-dose regimens. Metoclopramide was compared to haloperidol, also given in a high-dose parenteral regimen. Patients received two cycles of cisplatin at a dose greater than or equal to 70 mg/m2. Metoclopramide (2 mg/kg intravenous) was given every two hours for five doses beginning one half hour before cisplatin. Haloperidol (3 mg intravenous) was given on the same schedule. A randomized double-blind crossover design was used to control subjective bias and to compare the same patient's experiences. Twenty-eight patients completed both study arms. Excellent control of vomiting was achieved with both drugs. Metoclopramide resulted in 1.92 vomiting episodes (range, 0-5) with 36% having no vomiting. Haloperidol resulted in 3.04 vomiting episodes (range, 0-8) with 20% having no vomiting. Significantly fewer vomiting episodes were noted with metoclopramide rho = .006, paired sign test). However, responses to the two drugs were well correlated (Spearman's rho = .39, P = .03). Metoclopramide and haloperidol are both excellent antiemetics when given in sufficient dosage by an effective route. Metoclopramide does show a mild advantage. However, the positive correlation in response to these agents suggests a common mechanism of action. The ability to identify related antiemetics will be useful in the design of rational combination antiemetic therapy.

A phase II study of recombinant alpha interferon in patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

Thirty-three patients with advanced breast cancer were treated with a recombinant alpha interferon (rIFN-alpha 2). All patients were ambulatory (performance status greater than or equal to 50 Karnofsky scale) and almost all had received previous chemotherapy. Large intravenous dosages of 30 to 50 X 10(6) IU/m2 were given for five consecutive days every two to three weeks to 22 patients and smaller subcutaneous dosage of 2 X 10(6) IU/m2 three times a week to 11 patients. No complete or partial responses were seen. Two patients had stable disease and the remainder progressed. Flu-like syndromes were seen in all patients. Nausea, vomiting, and anorexia were frequent. Hypotension and confusion were noted in six and five patients, respectively. Life-threatening leukopenia was noted in two patients receiving intravenous dosage and thrombocytopenia was noted in one; no sepsis or bleeding complications were noted. In this study, a highly purified and biologically active rIFN-alpha 2 was not associated with activity in previously treated women with metastatic breast cancer.

Dose-ranging evaluation of the serotonin antagonist dolasetron mesylate in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin.

PURPOSE: This dose-ranging trial of intravenous dolasetron mesylate (MDL73,147EF) was performed to determine its adverse and antiemetic effects in patients receiving cisplatin at doses > or = 100 mg/m2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-nine patients treated with initial cisplatin received a single intravenous dose of dolasetron mesylate administered over 20 minutes beginning 30 minutes before chemotherapy. The following four dose levels were studied: 1.8, 2.4, 3.0, and 5.0 mg/kg. Emesis and adverse effects were measured for 24 hours after cisplatin. RESULTS: All adverse effects were mild and transient including loose stools, headache, serum AST/ALT elevations, and asymptomatic prolongation of ECG intervals. Among the dose levels, no-emesis rates from 24% to 52% were observed, and the percentage of patients having zero, one, or two emetic episodes ranged from 48% to 82%. Complete control of vomiting increased as the dose was escalated to 2.4 mg/kg, but did not improve further with higher doses. CONCLUSION: Dolasetron mesylate can be administered safely at doses up to 5.0 mg/kg, with comparable complete protection rates and increased adverse effects at doses greater than 2.4 mg/kg. Antiemetic activity was seen after cisplatin. Trials comparing single infusions of dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron are under way.

Evaluation of cisplatin intensity in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III study of the Southwest Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: To test the concept that cisplatin dose-intensity is important in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) performed a randomized trial comparing standard-dose cisplatin (SDCP) 50 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 on a 28-day cycle for eight cycles, high-dose cisplatin (HDCP) 100 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 for four cycles, and high-dose cisplatin plus mitomycin (HDCP-M) 8 mg/m2 day 1. To isolate the effects of dose-intensity versus total dose, the planned cumulative cisplatin dose was 800 mg/m2 in each arm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between July 1988 and April 1990, 356 patients were enrolled and 323 were eligible and assessable. All patients had metastatic, measurable disease, were chemotherapy-naive, and had a performance status (PS) of 0 to 2. RESULTS: Confirmed complete plus partial response rates were SDCP, 12%; HDCP, 14%; and HDCP-M, 27% (P < .05). Complete responses were uncommon (HDCP, 3%; HDCP-M, 4%) and were observed only in the high-dose arms. Progressive disease occurred more frequently in the SDCP arm (57%) compared with HDCP (38%) or HDCP-M (34%) (P < .05). However, there were no significant differences in median survival times (SDCP, 6.9 months; HDCP, 5.3 months; HDCP-M, 7.2 months; P = .53). The mean delivered dose-intensity for cisplatin was significantly greater in the high-dose arms: HDCP 41 mg/m2/wk and HDCP-M 39 mg/m2/wk, versus SDCP 23 mg/m2/wk (P = .05). The high-dose arms resulted in an increased incidence of ototoxicity, emesis, and myelosuppression, but similar degrees of renal toxicity and neuropathy compared with SDCP. CONCLUSION: This study does not confirm evidence of a steep clinical dose-response curve for cisplatin in NSCLC at the cisplatin dose-intensities achieved. The addition of mitomycin increases the response rate, but does not improve survival. Continued evaluation of new agents in this disease is warranted.

Advances in the management of nausea and vomiting induced by non-cisplatin containing chemotherapeutic regimens.

Nausea and vomiting are the most feared toxicities of chemotherapy. Afferent impulses from the chemoreceptor trigger zone, peripheral sites, the cerebral cortex, or the vestibular center can initiate the emetic reflex. Antiemetic protection therefore requires interruption of appropriate emetogenic pathways. Since the chemoreceptor trigger zone contains numerous dopaminergic neurons, antidopaminergic agents including phenothiazines and metoclopramide have gained importance as antiemetics. However standard dose phenothiazines have limited efficacy while high dose metoclopramide may have excessive toxicity in the non-cisplatin setting. Recent advances have therefore centered on development of new classes of antiemetics. Corticosteroids have excellent activity alone or in combination with other antiemetic agents. Cannabinoids have recently been introduced into commercial use as antiemetics with particular activity against non-cisplatin chemotherapy. Benzodiazepines are active against anticipatory nausea and vomiting and are also used in combination antiemetic regimens. Although the vestibular center seems to have a lesser influence on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, vestibular blocking agents such as scopolamine may have a potential role as adjunctive antiemetics. Finally, appreciation of the role of serotonin (5-HT3) receptors in both peripheral and central emetic pathways may lead to a new class of antiserotonergic antiemetic agents.

Potential for combination therapy with the new antiserotonergic agents.

Appreciation of the major role played by serotonergic (5-HT3) neuroreceptors in the emetic reflex arc has introduced an additional factor into the rational design of combination antiemetic therapy. Combinations of an antidopaminergic agent and a corticosteroid have previously served as the basis for many successful antiemetic regimens. Three pilot studies and three randomised studies have now demonstrated potentiation of antiemetic activity of a 5-HT3 antagonist by dexamethasone as well. Further development of combination antiemetic regimens may involve antagonism of additional receptors including those for benzodiazepines, opiates, and catecholamines. Even antidopaminergic agents may continue to have a role. Although high-dose metoclopramide has both antiserotonergic and antidopaminergic activity, other pure antidopaminergic agents retain significant antiemetic activity. The combination of an antiserotonergic agent and a low-dose antidopaminergic agent has already shown promise in one pilot study. Newer and more effective antiemetic combinations will be needed to continue to improve the quality of life of patients receiving chemotherapy.

Correlation of anti-emetic efficacy and plasma levels of ondansetron.

Intravenous ondansetron was administered at doses from 0.01 to 0.48 mg/kg every 4 h for three doses to patients receiving cisplatin 60-120 mg/m2 for the first time. Plasma samples were collected from 28 patients at baseline and at suitable times post-dose for pharmacokinetic analysis, and were assayed for ondansetron by high-pressure liquid chromatography. Plasma trough level was defined as the level before the third dose and 4 h area-under-the-curve (AUC4) was calculated with the linear trapezoidal method. Despite wide inter-patient variation, a correlation was seen between both trough level (r = 0.737, P less than 0.0001) and AUC4 (r = 0.903, P less than 0.001) related to dose. Trough level was also predictive of AUC4 (r = 0.824, P less than 0.0001). Frequency of complete protection (no emetic episodes) was equivalent throughout the AUC4 range, suggesting anti-emetic activity even at low AUC4. However, a trend toward better protection against failure (5 or more episodes) was seen when higher values of AUC4 were achieved, suggesting more consistent anti-emetic activity at moderate to high AUC4.

Functional relevance of antiemetic control. Experience using the FLIE questionnaire in a randomised study of the NK-1 antagonist aprepitant.

Little information exists on the functional impact of effective antiemetic protection. In the present study, the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE), was used to assess patient-reported impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) after administration of a new NK-1 receptor antagonist (aprepitant). Cisplatin-treated patients in a double-blind randomised trial received either aprepitant+dexamethasone+ondansetron on day 1 and aprepitant+dexamethasone on days 2-5 or standard antiemetic therapy (dexamethasone and ondansetron on day 1 and dexamethasone on days 2-5). Emetic events, nausea ratings and rescue medications were recorded in a 5-day diary and the FLIE was completed on day 6. Compared with standard therapy, significantly more patients treated with the high dose aprepitant regimen achieved a Complete Response (71 vs 44%, P<0.001) and also reported no impact on daily life as indicated by the FLIE total score (84 vs 66%, P<0.01). Use of the FLIE demonstrated that improved control of emesis was highly effective in reducing the impact of CINV on patients' daily lives.