Phase 2 trial results with the novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist casopitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial evaluated the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist casopitant mesylate in combination with ondansetron/dexamethasone (ond/dex) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) related to moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients who were receiving MEC (N=723) were randomized to receive either oral placebo or casopitant at doses of 50 mg, 100 mg, or 150 mg daily (on Days 1-3) plus ondansetron (on Days 1-3) and dexamethasone (Day 1). Two exploratory arms evaluated single-dose casopitant (150 mg) plus ond/dex and a 3-day casopitant regimen with once-daily ondansetron and dexamethasone. Primary endpoints were rates of complete response (CR) (no vomiting, retching, rescue therapy, or premature discontinuation) and significant nausea (SN) (>or=25 mm on a visual analog scale) over the first 120 hours after Cycle 1 of MEC. Secondary endpoints included acute and delayed CR and SN rates, rates of nausea, vomiting, and safety. RESULTS: All casopitant doses that were tested significantly increased the proportion of patients with CR: The CR rates were 80.8% with casopitant 50 mg, 78.5% with casopitant 100 mg, and 84.2% with casopitant 150 mg compared with 69.4% in the control group (P=.0127); casopitant 150 mg was identified as the minimally effective dose. In exploratory analyses, single-dose casopitant demonstrated a 79.2% CR rate, and once-daily ondansetron plus casopitant produced an 83.5% CR rate. Vomiting rates in the first 5 days after MEC were reduced with casopitant-containing regimens (from 23% to 10%-16%). Rates of SN did not differ among treatment arms (range, 28%-29%). Casopitant appeared to be well tolerated with no notable differences in overall adverse event frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Casopitant plus ond/dex was more effective than ond/dex alone for the prevention of CINV.

Role of initial NSAID choice and patient risk factors in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy: a decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of initial nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) choice in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy, based on relative clinical and economic effects. METHODS: To mimic clinical practice, a symptom-driven decision analytic model was constructed to compare 2 treatment strategies for long-term users of NSAIDs over a 1-year period: Strategy 1-generic NSAID used initially, and safer, more expensive NSAID reserved for treatment failures due to symptomatic gastropathy; and Strategy 2-safer, more expensive NSAID used in all instances. The only distinction between the strategies was the choice of initial NSAID. NSAIDs differed in gastrointestinal safety profiles and acquisition costs. The use and impact of antisecretory medications were included in the model. Because published data on patients' ulcer risk and relative NSAID safety show considerable variability, sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the key clinical outcomes and costs. RESULT: For patients without risk factors for NSAID ulcers (average risk), the model estimated that the strategy restricting use of the safer NSAID resulted in more symptomatic ulcers (Strategy 1, 2.58; Strategy 2, 0.73) and ulcer-related complications (Strategy 1, 1.18; Strategy 2, 0.23) per 100 patient years. The restricted strategy led to a significantly lower cost per patient treated (Strategy 1, $239; Strategy 2, $831 per year). In the principal analysis, the incremental costs to prevent symptomatic and complicated ulcers were $31,900 and $56,700, respectively. The estimated incremental cost per ulcer avoided was sensitive to the relative protection provided by the safer NSAID and fell dramatically as the patients' ulcer risk was increased above average risk. CONCLUSION: Unrestricted use of NSAIDs that reduce the risk of symptomatic ulcers has the potential to produce important clinical benefits at incremental cost. The impressive impact of ulcer risk on the incremental cost per ulcer prevented warrants increased attention to risk factor identification when NSAIDs are prescribed.

Cost-effectiveness comparison of therapy for psoriasis with a methotrexate-based regimen versus a rotation regimen of modified cyclosporine and methotrexate.

BACKGROUND: Because health care resources are limited, therapeutic regimens should be assessed for their relative costs and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: We assessed cost-effectiveness for treating psoriasis using two strategies: one consisted principally of methotrexate and the other was principally a rotational schedule of modified cyclosporine (Neoral) with methotrexate. METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis using a computerized decision analytic model of simulated patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment with one of the two strategies. Direct costs included acquisition of medications, laboratory and physician fees, and costs of treating side effects. Because of uncertainty regarding rates of clearing of psoriasis, the relative efficacy of methotrexate and cyclosporine was varied over a wide range in a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In the base case over a 10-year treatment period, the methotrexate strategy cost $33,000 and provided approximately 2 years clear of psoriasis compared with $38,000 and approximately 4 years clear of psoriasis for the rotational strategy. When the relative effectiveness of cyclosporine to methotrexate in clearing psoriasis varied from approximately 1 to 20, the rotational strategy cost from $4100 to $2700 per incremental clear year. CONCLUSION: In selecting therapies for psoriasis patients, both costs and effectiveness should be considered. In this simulation, patients could obtain additional periods clear of psoriasis at an incremental cost by using cyclosporine in rotation with methotrexate. If even a small utility gain accompanies the complete clearing of psoriasis, such a strategy may be a worthwhile investment of resources comparable to other healthcare interventions.