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.

Defining the clinical benefits of adding a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to control chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for antiemesis 2023 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) commonly affects patient quality of life and the overall effectiveness of chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate whether adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) to 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) and corticosteroids provides clinically meaningful benefits in preventing CINV in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web to identify clinical studies evaluating NK1RAs combined with 5-HT3RAs and dexamethasone for managing CINV in MEC. The endpoints were complete response (CR), complete control (CC), total control (TC), adverse events, and costs. The data were analyzed using a random effects model. RESULTS: From 142 articles identified, 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involving 4,405 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Approximately 60% of the patients received carboplatin (CBDCA)-based chemotherapy. The meta-analysis showed that triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with NK1RA was significantly more effective for achieving CR than doublet prophylaxis in each phase. Regarding CC, the triplet antiemetic prophylaxis was significantly more effective than the doublet in the overall (risk difference [RD]: 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.17) and delayed (RD: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.13) phases. For TC, no significant differences were observed in any phase. Adding NK1RA did not cause adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adding NK1RA to CBDCA-based chemotherapy has shown clinical benefits. However, the clinical benefits of NK1RA-containing regimens for overall MEC have not yet been established and require RCTs that exclusively evaluate MEC regimens other than CBDCA-based chemotherapy.

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.