Oral versus intravenous palonosetron in Chinese cancer patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: A non-inferiority phase III trial.

OBJECTIVE: The 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron (PALO) is approved (United States/Europe) as an oral formulation for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adult cancer patients undergoing moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) for the acute phase only, in the United States, or as intravenous (IV) formulation in patients undergoing MEC or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. This phase III study compares the efficacy/safety of oral versus IV PALO in Chinese patients. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with solid tumours scheduled for MEC received oral PALO 0.50 mg or IV PALO 0.25 mg. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority in terms of patients with complete response in the acute phase (0-24 hr post-chemotherapy). RESULTS: Complete response rates (acute phase), evaluated in 318/320 randomised patients, were 84.6% and 85.9% for oral and IV PALO respectively. Non-inferiority was demonstrated; the two formulations showed similar efficacy/safety. CONCLUSION: Non-inferiority of oral versus IV PALO in the acute phase was demonstrated in Chinese patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTR20140711.

Palonosetron compared with ondansetron in pediatric cancer patients: multicycle analysis of a randomized Phase III study.

AIM: To investigate across multiple cycles the efficacy and safety of palonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC/MEC). PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to 10, 20 µg/kg palonosetron or 3 × 150 µg/kg ondansetron for up to four cycles of HEC/MEC. RESULTS: In all on-study chemotherapy cycles, complete response rates were higher in patients in the 20 µg/kg palonosetron group than the ondansetron group. Treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the palonosetron 20 µg/kg and ondansetron groups. CONCLUSION: Over four cycles of HEC/MEC, 20 µg/kg palonosetron was an efficacious and safe treatment for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric cancer patients.

Palonosetron versus ondansetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in paediatric patients with cancer receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: a randomised, phase 3, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Palonosetron has shown efficacy in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of palonosetron versus ondansetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in paediatric patients. METHODS: In this multicentre, multinational, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study, paediatric patients aged between 0 and younger than 17 years, who were naive or non-naive to chemotherapy, and scheduled to undergo moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy for the treatment of malignant disease were randomised centrally (1:1:1) to receive up to four cycles of 10 µg/kg or 20 µg/kg palonosetron on day 1, or three 150 µg/kg doses of ondansetron on day 1, scheduled 4 h apart, according to a static central permuted block randomisation scheme by an interactive web response system. Randomisation was stratified according to age and emetogenicity. Treatment allocation was masked to project team members involved in data collection and analysis, and members of the investigator's team. The primary endpoint was complete response (no vomiting, retching, or use of rescue drugs) during the acute phase (0-24 h post-chemotherapy) of the first on-study chemotherapy cycle, as assessed in the population of randomly assigned patients who received moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy and an active study drug. The primary efficacy objective was to show the non-inferiority of palonosetron versus ondansetron during the acute phase (0-24 h post-chemotherapy) of the first on-study chemotherapy cycle through comparison of the difference in the proportions of patients who achieved a complete response with palonosetron (πT) minus ondansetron (πR) versus a preset non-inferiority margin (δ -15%). To be considered as non-inferior to ondansetron, for at least one of the doses of palonosetron, the lower limit of the 97·5% CI for the weighted sum of the differences in complete response rates had to be superior to -15%. Safety was assessed, according to treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01442376, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 12, 2011, and Oct 26, 2012, we randomly assigned 502 patients; 169 were assigned to receive 10 µg/kg palonosetron, 169 to receive 20 µg/kg palonosetron, and 164 to receive 3 × 150 µg/kg ondansetron, of whom 166, 165, and 162, respectively, were included in the efficacy analysis. In the acute phase, complete responses were recorded in 90 (54%) patients in the 10 µg/kg palonosetron group, 98 (59%) in the 20 µg/kg palonosetron group, and 95 (59%) in the ondansetron group. Non-inferiority versus ondansetron was shown for 20 µg/kg palonosetron in the acute phase (weighted sum of the differences in complete response rates 0·36% [97·5% CI -11·7 to 12·4]; p=0·0022). Non-inferiority versus ondansetron was not shown for 10 µg/kg palonosetron in the acute phase (weighted sum of the differences in complete response rates -4·41% [97·5% CI -16·4 to 7·6]). In the first on-study treatment cycle, treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 134 (80%) of 167 patients who received 10 µg/kg palonosetron, 113 (69%) of 163 who received 20 µg/kg palonosetron, and 134 (82%) of 164 who received ondansetron. The most common drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events were nervous system disorders, mainly headache, which occurred in three (2%) patients who received 10 µg/kg palonosetron, one (<1%) patient who received 20 µg/kg palonosetron, and two (1%) patients who received ondansetron. The incidence of serious adverse events in the first on-study treatment cycle was lower in the 20 µg/kg palonosetron group (43 [26%]) than in the 10 µg/kg palonosetron group (52 [31%]) and the ondansetron group (55 [34%]). INTERPRETATION: Non-inferiority was shown for 20 µg/kg palonosetron during the acute phase of the first on-study chemotherapy cycle. 20 µg/kg palonosetron is now indicated by the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in paediatric patients aged 1 month to younger than 17 years. FUNDING: Helsinn Healthcare.

Drug-drug interaction profile of components of a fixed combination of netupitant and palonosetron: Review of clinical data.

Neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonists (RAs) are commonly coadministered with serotonin (5-HT3) RAs (e.g. palonosetron (PALO)) to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting. Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA), an oral fixed combination of netupitant (NETU)-a new NK1 RA-and PALO, is currently under development. In vitro data suggest that NETU inhibits CYP3A4 and is a substrate for and weak inhibitor of P-glycoprotein (P-gp). This review evaluates potential drug-drug interactions between NETU or NEPA and CYP3A4 substrates/inducers/inhibitors or P-gp substrates in healthy subjects. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were evaluated for each drug when NETU was coadministered with PALO (single doses) and when single doses of NETU or NEPA were coadministered with CYP3A4 substrates (erythromycin (ERY), midazolam (MID), dexamethasone (DEX), or oral contraceptives), inhibitors (ketoconazole (KETO)), or inducers (rifampicin (RIF)), or a P-gp substrate (digoxin (DIG)). Results showed no relevant PK interactions between NETU and PALO. Coadministration of NETU increased MID and ERY exposure and significantly increased DEX exposure in a dose-dependent manner; NETU exposure was unaffected. NEPA coadministration had no clinically significant effect on oral contraception, although levonorgestrel exposure increased. NETU exposure increased after coadministration of NEPA with KETO and decreased after coadministration with RIF; PALO exposure was unaffected. NETU coadministration did not influence DIG exposure. In conclusion, there were no clinically relevant interactions between NETU and PALO, or NEPA and oral contraceptives (based on levonorgestrel and ethinylestradiol exposure). Coadministration of NETU or NEPA with CYP3A4 inducers/inhibitors/substrates should be done with caution. Dose reduction is recommended for DEX. Dose adjustments are not needed for NETU coadministration with P-gp substrates.

Effects of combined netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA), a cancer supportive care antiemetic, on the ECG of healthy subjects: an ICH E14 thorough QT trial.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is ranked among the worst side effects of chemotherapy. NEPA is an oral fixed-dose combination antiemetic under development, consisting of netupitant 300 mg, a highly selective NK1 receptor antagonist (RA), and palonosetron 0.5 mg, a pharmacologically and clinically distinct 5-HT3 RA. Although palonosetron is not associated with relevant ECG effects, this study evaluated cardiovascular safety of netupitant in combination with palonosetron, as well as its tolerability. This randomised, placebo- and positively controlled study in 197 subjects included 4 treatment groups: placebo, 200 mg netupitant + 0.5 mg palonosetron (NEPA200/0.5), 600 mg netupitant + 1.5 mg palonosetron (NEPA600/1.5, a supratherapeutic dose), and 400 mg moxifloxacin. Assessments included a 24-h baseline ECG recording, followed by a single dose of treatment and ECG measurements for 2 days. Mean placebo-corrected time-averaged changes from baseline were similar in NEPA200/0.5 and NEPA600/1.5 groups primarily for individually heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTcI: +4.7 and +3.6 ms, respectively) and for heart rate (HR: -3.3 bpm and -3.0 bpm), PR interval (-0.4 ms and 0.2 ms), and QRS interval (1 ms and 0.5 ms). The time-matched analysis showed no upper confidence interval >10 ms, with no suggestion of a QTc effect by pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling for parent/metabolites. Moxifloxacin showed the expected placebo-corrected change from baseline (+8.4 ms time average) and the expected profile to establish assay sensitivity. No new morphologic changes of clinical relevance were observed. Treatment-related adverse events were comparable among groups. This study showed that NEPA treatments produced no significant effects on QTcI, HR, PR interval, QRS interval, and cardiac morphology relative to placebo, even at supratherapeutic doses.

Netupitant PET imaging and ADME studies in humans.

Netupitant is a new, selective NK1 receptor antagonist under development for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Two studies were conducted to evaluate the brain receptor occupancy (RO) and disposition (ADME) of netupitant in humans. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with the NK1 receptor-binding-selective tracer [(11) C]-GR205171 was used to evaluate the brain penetration of different doses of netupitant (100, 300, and 450 mg) and to determine the NK1 -RO duration. A NK1 -RO of 90% or higher was achieved with all doses in the majority of the tested brain regions at Cmax, with a long duration of RO. The netupitant minimal plasma concentration predicted to achieve a NK1 -RO of 90%, C90% , in the striatum was 225 ng/mL; after administration of netupitant 300 mg, concentrations exceeded the C90% . In the ADME study, a single nominal dose of [(14) C]-netupitant 300 mg was used to assess its disposition. Absorption was rapid and netupitant was extensively metabolized via Phase I and II hepatic metabolism. Elimination of >90% was predicted at day 29 and was principally via hepatic/biliary route (>85%) with a minor contribution of the renal route (<5%). In conclusion, these studies demonstrate that netupitant is a potent agent targeting NK1 receptors with long lasting RO. In addition, netupitant is extensively metabolized and is mainly eliminated through the hepatic/biliary route and to a lesser extent via the kidneys.