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.

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.

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.

Combination Antiemetic Therapy for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with NSCLC Receiving Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy.

Purpose: The incidence of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving carboplatin (CBDCA)-based chemotherapy (CBDCA + pemetrexed or paclitaxel) has not been clearly described. Therefore, we attempted to evaluate whether delayed CINV could be controlled using a combination of three antiemetics and identify individual risk factors. Methods: We pooled data from two prospective observational studies, namely a nationwide survey of CINV and a prospective, observational study in Japan, to assess whether delayed CINV could be controlled using a combination of three antiemetics and identified individual risk factors via inverse probability treatment-weighted analysis. Results: In total, 240 patients were evaluable in this study (median age, 66 years; male, 173; female, 67). The three-antiemetic regimen controlled delayed nausea (31.6% vs 47.3%) and vomiting (5.1% vs 23.1%) better than two antiemetics. Younger age (<70 years; odds ratio [OR] = 2.233), motion sickness (OR = 3.472), drinking habits (OR = 1.972), receipt of the CBDCA + pemetrexed regimen (OR = 2.041), and the use of two antiemetics (OR = 1.926) were risk factors for delayed nausea. Female sex (OR = 3.372), drinking habits (OR = 2.272), receipt of the CBDCA+ pemetrexed regimen (OR = 2.314), and the use of two antiemetics (OR = 6.830) were risk factors for delayed vomiting. Conclusion: Female sex, younger age, and receipt of the CBDCA + pemetrexed regimen increased the risk of CINV. Therefore, we recommend additional supportive antiemetics treatment for these patients.

Therapeutic effect of anti-HMGB1 antibody in a mouse model of 4-h middle cerebral artery occlusion: comparison with tissue plasminogen activator.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) treatment increases the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage in patients with ischemic stroke. We previously demonstrated that tPA treatment caused hemorrhagic complications in a 4-h middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) mouse model when administered after reperfusion. In the present study, we administered an anti-high mobility group box 1 (αHMGB1) antibody to 4-h MCAO mice to evaluate the usability of αHMGB1 antibody treatment in the delayed phase of ischemia, beyond the therapeutic time window of tPA. METHODS: αHMGB1 antibody, tPA and control IgG were dissolved in normal saline and administered intravenously into the tail vein of the mice after reperfusion. Infarct volume, hemorrhagic volume, brain swelling, functional outcomes and levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as HMGB1, interleukin (IL)-6 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, were evaluated 24 h after MCAO. RESULTS: tPA treatment was not only ineffective but also caused a massive intracerebral hemorrhage. Treatment with αHMGB1 antibody reduced the infarct volume and swelling and ameliorated neurologic impairment and motor coordination without hemorrhagic complications by inhibiting HMGB1 activity. Moreover, the αHMGB1 antibody suppressed pathways of secondary inflammatory responses, such as IL-6 and TNF-α, after cerebral ischemia. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that αHMGB1 antibody may be therapeutically efficient in the delayed phase of ischemia, where tPA treatment is no longer an eligible option. Treatment with an αHMGB1 antibody may be an effective therapeutic option in patients who exceed the tPA therapeutic time window.

Study protocol for a double-blind, comparative, randomised Japanese trial of triplet standard antiemetic therapies with or without 5 mg olanzapine to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting for patients with breast cancer treated with an anthracycline/cyclophosphamide regimen (JTOP-B).

INTRODUCTION: Triple antiemetic therapy with neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone has been widely recommended for high emetogenic chemotherapeutic (HEC) agents and regimens, including anthracycline combined with cyclophosphamide (AC). The addition of olanzapine (OLZ) 5 mg or 10 mg to the recommended triple antiemetic therapy has demonstrated superiority in antiemetic efficacy compared with the standard triplet therapy for a cisplatin-based HEC regimen. Although OLZ plus the triple antiemetic treatment may also be effective for patients on an AC-based HEC regimen, no study has investigated its efficacy at a lower dose of 5 mg. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To assess whether 5 mg OLZ, as compared with placebo, in combination with triple combination therapy, significantly improves nausea and vomiting, we are conducting a randomised, parallel-group controlled clinical trial with a total of 500 patients at 15 study centres in Japan. The primary outcome is the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue medication during 120 hours after the initiation of chemotherapy. Treatment group comparison for the primary endpoint will be done by using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the institutional review board of Juntendo University Hospital and relevant approval was obtained from all participating centres. All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. The trial results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) jRCT1031200134; protocol date: 30 July 2020, version: 1.3, approval: 25 August 2020.

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.

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.

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.

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.

5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during moderately emetic chemotherapy for solid tumors: a multicenter, prospective, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30-90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. RESULTS: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26-84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51 and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5) + ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

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.

Antithrombin gamma attenuates macrophage/microglial activation and brain damage after transient focal cerebral ischemia in mice.

AIMS: Thrombin formation is increased in patients with acute cerebral ischemic stroke, and augments coagulation and inflammation in the brain. Administration of antithrombin (AT) was previously reported to be protective against renal and myocardial ischemic injury. Thus, we hypothesized that treatment with AT would be neuroprotective against cerebral ischemic injury. This study evaluated the effects of AT treatment on ischemic inflammation and brain damage in mice subjected to middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO). MAIN METHODS: A mouse model of 4-hour MCAO was used to induce ischemic brain injury. Recombinant AT gamma was administered intravenously immediately after reperfusion at 4 h after MCAO. Infarct volume, neurological deficit, and regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) were measured at 24 h after MCAO. To evaluate the effect of AT gamma on ischemic inflammation, we measured the number of Iba1-positive cells (marker of macrophage/microglial activation) and levels of proinflammatory cytokines. Further, we investigated the direct anti-inflammatory effects of rAT in the J774.1 cell line. KEY FINDINGS: Treatment with AT gamma (480 U/kg) reduced infarct volume and neurological deficit, and improved rCBF, in MCAO mice. Moreover, AT gamma treatment decreased the number of Iba1-positive cells and levels of proinflammatory cytokines. In vitro, treatment with thrombin significantly increased proinflammatory cytokine levels, which was significantly reduced by pretreatment with AT gamma. SIGNIFICANCE: Treatment with AT showed neuroprotective effects via anticoagulation actions, as well as direct anti-inflammatory effects on macrophage/microglial activation. These data suggest that AT may be a useful new therapeutic option for cerebral ischemia.

Influence of proton pump inhibitors and H2-receptor antagonists on the efficacy and safety of dasatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia patients.

We evaluated the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) on the efficacy and safety of dasatinib for chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). Retrospective analyses were performed for patients with CP-CML who received dasatinib at seven hospitals between April 2009 and December 2016. Seventy-three patients were identified, 16 of whom received PPIs or H2RAs concurrently with dasatinib. Major molecular response at 12 months was observed in 13 of 13 patients (100%) with concurrent PPIs or H2RAs (combination group), and in 23 of 51 patients (45.1%) who received only dasatinib (dasatinib-alone group; P < 0.001). Deep molecular response at 12 months was observed in four of six patients (66.7%) in the combination group, and seven of 38 patients (18.4%) in the dasatinib-alone group (P = 0.027). Dasatinib chemotherapy was stopped after 18 months for 25 patients (43.9%) from the dasatinib-alone group, but for none from the combination group. Combination treatment with PPIs or H2RAs did not reduce the efficacy of dasatinib. PPIs and H2RAs reduce the incidence of dasatinib discontinuation due to adverse events and increase the efficacy of dasatinib chemotherapy for patients.

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.

[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).

Evaluation of Combination Antiemetic Therapy on CINV in Patients With Gynecologic Cancer Receiving TC Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The incidence of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), especially nausea, in gynecologic cancer patients who receive paclitaxel and carboplatin (TC) chemotherapy is unclear. We assessed risk factors for delayed CINV in these patients, and examined whether it was controlled with combination antiemetic therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from two prospective studies, and compared between the two antiemetic prophylaxis groups using inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) analysis. RESULTS: Among the 182 evaluable patients (mean age: 56.2 years), three antiemetics gave better overall control than two for delayed nausea (42.9% vs. 57.4%,) and vomiting (13.8% vs. 34.5%). Risk factor for delayed nausea was age [odds ratio (OR)=0.953; p=0.0898[and use of two antiemetics (vs. three antiemetics) for delayed vomiting (OR=0.304; p=0.0732). CONCLUSION: A combination of three antiemetics controls delayed CINV among patients who undergo TC chemotherapy. Identification of risk factors can facilitate personalized treatments.

Risk factors for delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with low-emetic-risk chemotherapy: a prospective, observational, multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Improvement in the control of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is needed. There is limited information on antiemetic prophylaxis for patients undergoing low-emetic-risk chemotherapy (LEC), and the optimal antiemetic treatment is not well understood. Therefore, we analyzed the risk factors for delayed CINV to aid in the development of individualized treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter study was conducted in 13 hospitals and included patients with solid cancers undergoing LEC. A total of 222 patients were enrolled between September 2013 and November 2014. The participants completed a daily diary for 5 days after the commencement of the first cycle of LEC to describe the daily incidence of CINV (yes/no). Furthermore, the participants described the severity of nausea and the amount of food intake with the help of VAS. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten patients provided their data that were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression to examine the risk factors for delayed CINV. History of CINV, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥1, acute CINV, and single-day antiemetic prophylaxis were identified as independent risk factors for delayed CINV. CONCLUSION: The current use of antiemetic prophylaxis according to the recommended guideline appears to effectively control delayed CINV in patients undergoing LEC. Therefore, patients with the abovementioned risk factors should be carefully observed, and their treatment should be adjusted according to their symptoms. The use of multiple-day dexamethasone may be beneficial for those patients who develop acute CINV, especially when it is accompanied by anorexia.