Characteristics of nausea and its impact on health-related quality of life in cisplatin-treated patients receiving dexamethasone-sparing prophylaxis: an analysis of the LUNG-NEPA study.

PURPOSE: We investigated the intensity and duration of nausea as well as its impact on health-related quality of life among cisplatin-treated patients who participated in a study of dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing regimens based on NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron). METHODS: This retrospective analysis included chemo-naive patients from a trial evaluating non-inferiority of DEX on day 1 (DEX1 arm) combined with NEPA, compared with the same regimen with DEX administered on days 1-4 (DEX4; reference arm) following cisplatin (≥ 70 mg/m2) administration. Nausea intensity was self-rated using a four-point Likert scale. Extended nausea duration was considered ≥ 3 days within the 5 days post-chemotherapy. Patients completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire on day 6. RESULTS: In the DEX1 arm, more patients (20/76) experienced acute nausea, influencing the outcome of delayed nausea (38/76). During days 1 to 5, 51.3% (39/76) and 39.5% (30/76) of patients experienced nausea in the DEX1 and DEX4 arms, respectively (P = 0.192). Of these, 43.6% and 60% reported moderate-to-severe nausea, respectively, in the DEX1 and DEX4 arms (P = 0.200), while 74.4% and 56.7% of patients experienced extended nausea duration (P = 0.122). Similar between-arm rates of nauseated patients reported an impact on daily life (79.5% vs. 70%; P = 0.408). In analyses stratified for antiemetic regimen, moderate-to-severe nausea or extended nausea duration was associated with an impact on daily life (P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite the higher incidence, there was no suggestion of any strong adverse effect of NEPA plus single-dose DEX on the characteristics of nausea as well as its impact on daily life in patients with cisplatin-induced nausea. Further prospective controlled study is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04201769. Registration date: 17/12/2019.

Dexamethasone-sparing regimens with NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in older patients (>65 years) fit for cisplatin: A sub-analysis from a phase 3 study.

INTRODUCTION: We recently demonstrated the non-inferiority of two dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing regimens with an oral fixed-combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) versus the guideline-recommended DEX use for cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. Since prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is critical in older patients, we retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of the DEX-sparing regimens in this subset. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chemo-naive patients aged >65 years treated with high-dose cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2) were eligible. Patients received NEPA and DEX on day 1 and were randomized to receive either (1) no further DEX (DEX1), (2) oral low-dose DEX (4 mg) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or (3) the guideline-recommended standard DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4). The primary efficacy endpoint of the parent study was complete response (CR; no vomiting and no use of rescue medication) during the overall phase (days 1-5). No significant nausea (NSN; none or mild nausea) and the proportion of patients reporting no impact on daily life (NIDL) which was evaluated by the Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaire on day 6 (overall combined score > 108), were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Among the 228 patients in the parent study, 107 were > 65 years. Similar CR rates [95% confidence intervals (CI)] were observed in patients over 65 years across treatment groups [DEX1: 75% (59.7-86.8%); DEX3: 80.6% (62.5-92.6%); DEX4: 75% (56.6-88.5%)] as well as versus the total study population. NSN rates were also similar in the older-patients across treatment groups (p = 0.480) but were higher compared with the total population. Similar rates of NIDL (95% CI) were reported in the older-patient subset across treatment groups [DEX1: 61.5% (44.6-76.6%); DEX3: 64.3% (44.1-81.4%); DEX4: 62.1% (42.3-79.3%); p = 1.0] during the overall phase, as well as versus total population. A similar proportion of older patients across treatment groups experienced DEX-related side effects. DISCUSSION: This analysis shows that older-patients who are fit for cisplatin benefit from a simplified regimen of NEPA plus single-dose DEX with neither loss in antiemetic efficacy nor the adverse impact on patient daily functioning. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04201769) on 17/12/2019 (retrospectively registered).

Exploratory analysis of the effect of a dexamethasone-sparing regimen for prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis on food intake (LUNG-NEPA study).

We demonstrated the non-inferiority of a dexamethasone (DEX)-sparing (single-dose) regimen with NEPA, a netupitant/palonosetron fixed combination, for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) caused by cisplatin. This pre-planned exploratory analysis assessed the effect of the DEX-sparing regimen on a patient's food intake. Chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing cisplatin (≥ 70 mg/m2) were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized to receive either no further DEX (DEX1), or oral DEX (4 mg BID) on days 2-4 (DEX4). Patient-reported endpoint maintenance of usual daily food intake was assessed during the 5-days post-chemotherapy. The relationship between usual daily food intake and CINV control, pre-chemotherapy self-rated food intake and BMI-adjusted weight loss (WL) were evaluated. One-hundred fifty-two patients (76/group) were assessable. The proportion of patients reporting maintenance of usual daily food intake was similar in both groups: 69.7% (95% CI, 58.6-78.9) for DEX1 vs. 72.4% (95% CI, 61.4-81.2) for DEX4. Only CINV control was significantly associated with maintenance of usual daily food intake (P ≤ 0.001) during the overall phase. The DEX-sparing regimen does not adversely affect patient-reported daily food intake post-chemotherapy. The current analysis adds further insights into antiemetic efficacy of DEX sparing beyond day 1 in the challenging setting of cisplatin.Trial registration: The parent study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04201769).

Thrombin Generation and D-Dimer for Prediction of Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients with Metastatic Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Background: the tight and reciprocal interaction between cancer and hemostasis has stimulated investigations on the possible role of hemostatic biomarkers in predicting specific cancer outcomes, such as disease progression (DP) and overall survival (OS). In a prospective cohort of newly diagnosed metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients from the HYPERCAN study, we aimed to assess whether the hemostatic biomarker levels measured before starting any anticancer therapy may specifically predict for 6-months DP (6m-DP) and for 1-year OS (1y OS). Methods: plasma samples were collected and tested for thrombin generation (TG) as global hemostatic assay, and for D-dimer, fibrinogen, and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 as hypercoagulation biomarkers. DP and mortality were monitored during follow-up. Results: A prospective cohort of 462 colorectal and 164 gastric cancer patients was available for analysis. After 6 months, DP occurred in 148 patients, providing a cumulative incidence of 24.8% (21.4−28.4). D-dimer and TG endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) were identified as independent risk factors for 6m-DP by multivariate Fine−Gray proportional hazard regression model corrected for age, cancer site, and >1 metastatic site. After 1 year, we observed an OS of 75.7% (71.9−79.0). Multivariate Cox regression analysis corrected for age, site of cancer, and performance status identified D-dimer and ETP as independent risk factors for 1y OS. Patients with one or both hemostatic parameters above the dichotomizing threshold were at higher risk for both 6m-DP and 1-year mortality. Conclusion.: in newly diagnosed metastatic GI cancer patients, pretreatment ETP and D-dimer appear promising candidate biomarkers for predicting 6m-DP and 1y OS. In this setting, for the first time, the role of TG as a prognostic biomarker emerges in a large prospective cohort.

Evaluating the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on daily functioning in patients receiving dexamethasone-sparing antiemetic regimens with NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) in the cisplatin setting: results from a randomized phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The non-inferiority of dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1, with or without low-dose DEX on days 2 and 3, combined with oral NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron), compared with the guideline-consistent use of DEX was demonstrated in cisplatin. Here, we complete the analysis by assessing the impact of emesis on daily lives of patients receiving DEX-sparing regimens using the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2), were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized to receive either 1) no further DEX (DEX1), 2) oral DEX (4 mg daily) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or 3) DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4; control). Patients completed the FLIE questionnaire on day 6 of cycle 1. Endpoints included the FLIE nausea domain, vomiting domain, and overall combined domain scores, as well as the proportion of patients with no impact on daily life (NIDL; overall score > 108). This was a protocol-planned analysis. RESULTS: In the DEX1 group, no significant differences were observed in the FLIE nausea score (48.9 [±1.8; SE] vs. 53.7 [±1.5]), vomiting score (56.6 [±1.4] vs. 58.7 [±0.8]) and overall score (105.6 [±2.8] vs.112.4 [±1.9]) versus DEX4 control; similar results were observed in the DEX3 group for nausea score (49.6 [±1.7]), vomiting score (58.2 [±1]) and overall score (107.8 [±2.4]) versus control. There were no significant between-group differences in the proportion of patients reporting NIDL. CONCLUSION: Reducing DEX, when administered with NEPA, does not seem to adversely impact the daily functioning in patients undergoing cisplatin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04201769 . Registration date: 17/12/2019 - Retrospectively registered.

Efficacy of the dexamethasone-sparing triplet regimen for preventing cisplatin-induced emesis: a combined analysis.

Aim: To further evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of single-dose versus multiple-dose dexamethasone (DEX) against nausea and vomiting caused by cisplatin. Materials & methods: Two similar non-inferiority studies were pooled. Patients were randomized to single-day DEX or multiple-day DEX plus palonosetron and neurokinin-1 receptor-antagonists (NK-1RAs). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no vomiting and no rescue medication) during the overall phase. Results: The combined analysis included 242 patients. The absolute risk difference between single day versus multi-day DEX for CR was -2% (95% CI, -14 to 9%). Conclusion: Administration of single-dose DEX offers comparable antiemetic control to multiple-day DEX when combined with palonosetron and an NK-1RA in the setting of single-day cisplatin.

We aimed at further evaluating how well the corticosteroid, dexamethasone (DEX), works as measured in two similar clinical studies of single-day versus multiple-day DEX for the prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by cisplatin, a cell-killing drug, which has high potential of triggering nausea and vomiting. In both studies, cancer patients were randomly assigned to 1-day DEX or multiple-day DEX (3­4 days) in combination with palonosetron (this antagonist attaches to a specific receptor for serotonin without triggering nausea and vomiting), and neurokinin-1 receptor-antagonists (NK-1RAs; they attach to the NK-1 receptor without triggering nausea and vomiting). The combined analysis of the two studies, which includes 242 patients, showed that a single dose of DEX is as effective as multiple-day DEX in terms of the number of patients achieving complete response (defined as no vomiting and no 'as-needed' use of antiemetics) during the 5 days after cisplatin administration. Therefore, administration of single-dose DEX offers comparable antiemetic control to multiple-day DEX when combined with palonosetron and an NK-1RA in patients undergoing single-day cisplatin.

Netupitant-palonosetron (NEPA) for Preventing Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting: From Clinical Trials to Daily Practice.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event associated with many anticancer therapies and can negatively impact patients' quality of life and potentially limit the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Currently, CINV can be prevented in most patients with guideline-recommended antiemetic regimens. However, clinicians do not always follow guidelines, and patients often face difficulties adhering to their prescribed treatments. Therefore, approaches to increase guideline adherence need to be implemented. NEPA is the first and only fixed combination antiemetic, composed of netupitant (oral)/fosnetupitant (intravenous) and palonosetron, which, together with dexamethasone, constitute a triple antiemetic combination recommended for the prevention of CINV for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy and for certain patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Thus, NEPA offers a convenient and straightforward antiemetic treatment that could improve adherence to guidelines. This review provides an overview of CINV, evaluates the accumulated evidence of NEPA's antiemetic activity and safety from clinical trials and real-world practice, and examines the preliminary evidence of antiemetic control with NEPA in daily clinical settings beyond those described in pivotal trials. Moreover, we review the utility of NEPA in controlling nausea and preserving patients' quality of life during chemotherapy, two major concerns in managing patients with cancer.

In Vitro Evaluation of Rigosertib Antitumoral and Radiosensitizing Effects against Human Cholangiocarcinoma Cells.

Cholangiocarcinoma is the first most common cancer of the biliary tract. To date, surgical resection is the only potentially curative option, but it is possible only for a limited percentage of patients, and in any case survival rate is quite low. Moreover, cholangiocarcinoma is often chemotherapy-resistant, and the only drug with a significant benefit for patient's survival is Gemcitabine. It is necessary to find new drugs or combination therapies to treat nonresectable cholangiocarcinoma and improve the overall survival rate of patients. In this work, we evaluate in vitro the antitumoral effects of Rigosertib, a multi-kinase inhibitor in clinical development, against cholangiocarcinoma EGI-1 cell lines. Rigosertib impairs EGI-1 cell viability in a dose- and time-dependent manner, reversibility is dose-dependent, and significant morphological and nuclear alterations occur. Moreover, Rigosertib induces the arrest of the cell cycle in the G2/M phase, increases autophagy, and inhibits proteasome, cell migration, and invasion. Lastly, Rigosertib shows to be a stronger radiosensitizer than Gemcitabine and 5-Fluorouracil. In conclusion, Rigosertib could be a potential therapeutic option, alone or in combination with radiations, for nonresectable patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Dexamethasone-Sparing Regimens with Oral Netupitant and Palonosetron for the Prevention of Emesis Caused by High-Dose Cisplatin: A Randomized Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the overall exposure to dexamethasone (DEX) in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy, we evaluated the noninferiority of DEX on day 1, with or without low-dose DEX on days 2 and 3, combined with an oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA), compared with the guideline-consistent use of 4-day DEX. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter study, chemotherapy-naïve patients undergoing high-dose cisplatin (≥70 mg/m2 ), were given NEPA and DEX (12 mg) on day 1 and randomized (1:1:1 ratio) to receive either (a) no further DEX (DEX1), (b) oral DEX (4 mg daily) on days 2-3 (DEX3), or (c) DEX (4 mg twice daily) on days 2-4 (DEX4). The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (CR: no emesis and no rescue medication) during the 5-day overall phase. The noninferiority margin was set at -15% difference (DEX1 or DEX3 minus DEX4). Secondary efficacy endpoints included complete protection (CP: CR and none or mild nausea). RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty-eight patients, 76 in each arm, were assessable. Noninferiority was met for both DEX-sparing regimens and the reference arm, with overall phase CR rates of 76.3% in each of the DEX1 and DEX3 arms and 75.0% in the DEX4 arm (95% confidence interval, -12.3% to 15% for each comparison). During the overall phase, CP rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: A simplified regimen of NEPA plus single-dose DEX offers comparable chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention throughout 5 days post-chemotherapy with the advantage of sparing patients additional doses of DEX in the high-emetic-risk setting of cisplatin-based chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Dexamethasone (DEX) has traditionally played an integral role in the management of chemotherapy-induced emesis. Although generally considered safe, even short-term DEX use is associated with various side effects, and some evidence suggests that concurrent steroids may reduce the efficacy of immunotherapies. This study demonstrates comparable antiemetic control during the 5 days post-chemotherapy with a simplified regimen of netupitant/palonosetron plus single-dose DEX versus the standard 4-day DEX reference treatment in high-dose cisplatin. This represents a clinically relevant achievement as it not only simplifies antiemetic prophylaxis but also offers an opportunity to appropriately use in patients where caution with corticosteroid use is advised.

Validation of the Role of Thrombin Generation Potential by a Fully Automated System in the Identification of Breast Cancer Patients at High Risk of Disease Recurrence.

Background The measurement of thrombin generation (TG) potential by the calibrated automated thrombogram (CAT) assay provides a strong contribution in identifying patients at high risk of early disease recurrence (E-DR). However, CAT assay still needs standardization and clinical validation. Objective In this study, we aimed to validate the role of TG for E-DR prediction by means of the fully automated ST Genesia system. Methods A prospective cohort of 522 patients from the HYPERCAN study with newly diagnosed resected high-risk breast cancer was included. Fifty-two healthy women acted as controls. Plasma samples were tested for protein C, free-protein S, and TG by ST Genesia by using the STG-ThromboScreen reagent with and without thrombomodulin (TM). Results In the absence of TM, patients showed significantly higher peak and ETP compared with controls. In the presence of TM, significantly lower inhibition of ETP and Peak were observed in patients compared with controls. E-DR occurred in 28 patients; these patients had significantly higher peak and endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) in the absence of TM compared with disease-free patients. Multivariable analysis identified mastectomy, luminal B HER2-neg, triple negative subtypes, and ETP as independent risk factors for E-DR. These variables were combined to generate a risk assessment score, able to stratify patients in three-risk categories. The E-DR rates were 0, 4.7, and 13.5% in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories (hazard ratio = 8.7; p < 0.05, low vs. high risk). Conclusion Our data validate the ETP parameter with a fully automated standardized system and confirm its significant contribution in identifying high-risk early breast cancer at risk for E-DR during chemotherapy.

Practice Patterns for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting and Antiemetic Guideline Adherence Based on Real-World Prescribing Data.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-recommended antiemetic prophylaxis improves nausea and vomiting control in most patients undergoing chemotherapy. Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/European Society for Medical Oncology (MASCC/ESMO) antiemetic guidelines recommend prophylaxis with a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA), a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), and dexamethasone for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), including anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)- and carboplatin (considered moderately emetogenic chemotherapy)-based chemotherapy. Here, we analyze the use of NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis associated with HEC and carboplatin. METHODS: The data source was the Global Oncology Monitor (Ipsos Healthcare). Geographically representative physicians from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the U.K. were screened for treatment involvement and number of patients treated per month. Patients' data from January to December 2018 were collected from medical charts and extrapolated on the basis of the total number of physicians who prescribe chemotherapy. The emetic risk of chemotherapy was classified per MASCC/ESMO guidelines. RESULTS: Data from 45,324 chemotherapy-treated patients were collected, representing a total extrapolated prevalence of 1,394,848 chemotherapy treatments included in the analysis. NK1 RAs were used in 45%, 42%, and 19% of patients receiving cisplatin-, AC-, and carboplatin-based chemotherapy, respectively; 18%, 24%, and 7% received the guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone combination; no antiemetics were prescribed for 12% of the treatments. Often, physicians' perception of the emetic risk of chemotherapy did not follow MASCC/ESMO guideline classification. CONCLUSION: Low adherence to antiemetic guidelines was revealed in clinical practice in five European countries, with 15% of all HEC-/carboplatin-based treatments receiving guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone prophylaxis and 12% of them receiving no antiemetics. New strategies for improving guideline adherence are urgently needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Despite recent advances in antiemetic therapy, a substantial proportion of patients experience nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy in daily clinical practice. Antiemetic guidelines aim at prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and guideline-consistent antiemetic therapy can effectively prevent vomiting and, to a lesser extent, nausea in most patients with cancer. This study reports low adherence to antiemetic guidelines in the highly emetogenic chemotherapy setting in daily clinical practice across five European countries. Opportunity exists to increase adherence to antiemetic guideline recommendations. Implementation of strategies to facilitate guideline adherence can potentially improve CINV control.

Thrombin generation predicts early recurrence in breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients present with a hypercoagulable state often associated with poor disease prognosis. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate whether thrombin generation (TG), a global coagulation test, may be a useful tool to improve the identification of patients at high risk of early disease recurrence (ie, E-DR within 2 years) after breast cancer surgery. PATIENTS/METHODS: A cohort of 522 newly diagnosed patients with surgically resected high-risk breast cancer were enrolled in the ongoing prospective HYPERCAN study. TG potential was measured in plasma samples collected before starting systemic chemotherapy. Significant predictive hemostatic and clinic-pathological parameters were identified in the derivation cohort by Cox regression analysis. A risk prognostic score for E-DR was generated in the derivation and tested in the validation cohort. RESULTS: After a median observation period of 3.4 years, DR occurred in 51 patients, 28 of whom were E-DR. E-DR subjects presented with the highest TG values as compared to both late-DR (from 2 to 5 years) and no relapse subjects (P < .01). Multivariate analysis in the derivation cohort identified TG, mastectomy, triple negative and Luminal B HER2-neg molecular subtypes as significant independent predictors for E-DR, which were utilized to generate a risk assessment score. In the derivation and validation cohorts, E-DR rates were 2.3% and 0% in the low-risk, 10.1% and 6.3% in the intermediate-risk, and 18.2% and 16.7%, in the high-risk categories, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of TG in a risk-assessment model for E-DR significantly helps the identification of operated breast cancer patients at high risk of very early relapse.

Oral Capecitabine-Vinorelbine is Associated with Longer Overall Survival When Compared to Single-Agent Capecitabine in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

Background: Single-agent capecitabine (C) is a moderately effective chemotherapeutic compound in the treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The capecitabine-vinorelbine (CV) combination is also used due to a good tolerability profile, but no studies have demonstrated its superiority over single-agent C. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis to compare overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in patients with HER2-negative mBC treated with CV vs. single-agent C. Results: Out of 290 patients included in this study, 127 (43.8%) received single-agent C, while 163 (56.2%) patients were treated with CV. Median PFS was similar in patients treated with single-agent C or CV, while CV was associated with significantly longer OS in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC. This OS advantage was confirmed at multivariable analysis also after propensity score-based matching of patients according to relevant clinical or tumor characteristics. When compared with single-agent C, CV was associated with higher incidence of G3/G4 and any-grade nausea/vomiting, diarrhea and increased transaminases. Conclusions: While prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings, the potential OS advantage of CV over single-agent C in HR+ mBC patients must be weighed against a significantly higher incidence of AEs.

Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) and dexamethasone for prevention of emesis in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide: a multi-cycle, phase II study.

BACKGROUND: NEPA is an oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant, a new highly selective neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and palonosetron. This study was conducted to evaluate whether the efficacy of NEPA against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cycle 1 would be maintained over subsequent chemotherapy cycles in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC). The study also describes the relationship between efficacy on day 1 through 5 (overall period) and control of CINV on day 6 through 21 (very late period) in each cycle. METHODS: In this multicentre, phase II study, patients received both NEPA and dexamethasone (12 mg intravenously) just before chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medication use) in cycle 1. Sustained efficacy was evaluated during the subsequent cycles by calculating the rate of CR in cycles 2-4 and by assessing the probability of sustained CR over multiple cycles. The impact of both overall CR and risk factors for CINV on the control of very late events (vomiting and moderate-to-severe nausea) were also examined. RESULTS: Of the 149 patients enrolled in the study, 139 were evaluable for a total of 552 cycles; 97.8% completed all 4 cycles. The proportion of patients with an overall CR was 70.5% (90% CI, 64.1 to 76.9) in cycle 1, and this was maintained in subsequent cycles. The cumulative percentage of patients with a sustained CR over 4 cycles was 53%. NEPA was well tolerated across cycles. In each cycle, patients with CR experienced a significantly better control of very late CINV events than those who experienced no CR. Among the patients with CR, the only predictor for increased likelihood of developing very late CINV was pre-chemotherapy (anticipatory) nausea (adjusted odds ratio = 0.65-0.50 for no CINV events on cycles 3 and 4). CONCLUSION: The high anti-emetic efficacy seen with the NEPA regimen in the first cycle was maintained over multiple cycles of adjuvant AC for breast cancer. Preliminary evidence also suggests that patients achieving a CR during the overall period gain high protection even against very late CINV events in each chemotherapy cycle. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was retrospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov identifier (NCT03862144) on 05/Mar/2019.

Thrombotic biomarkers for risk prediction of malignant disease recurrence in patients with early stage breast cancer.

In cancer patients, hypercoagulability is a common finding. It has been associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism, but also to tumor proliferation and progression. In this prospective study of a large cohort of breast cancer patients, we aimed to evaluate whether pre-chemotherapy abnormalities in hemostatic biomarkers levels: (i) are associated with breast cancer-specific clinico-pathological features; and (ii) can predict for disease recurrence. D-dimer, fibrinogen, prothrombin fragment 1+2, and FVIIa/antithrombin levels were measured in 701 early-stage resected breast cancer patients candidate to adjuvant chemotherapy and prospectively enrolled in the HYPERCAN study. Significant prognostic parameters for disease recurrence were identified by Cox regression multivariate analysis and used for generating a risk assessment model. Pre-chemotherapy D-dimer, fibrinogen, and pro-thrombin fragment 1+2 levels were significantly associated with tumor size and lymph node metastasis. After 3.4 years of follow up, 71 patients experienced a recurrence. Cox multivariate analysis identified prothrombin fragment 1+2, tumor size, and Luminal B HER2-negative or triple negative molecular subtypes as independent risk factors for disease recurrence. Based on these variables, we generated a risk assessment model that significantly differentiated patients at low- and high-risk of recurrence (cumulative incidence: 6.2 vs 20.7%; Hazard Ratio=3.5; P<0.001). Our prospective clinical and laboratory data from the HYPERCAN study were crucial for generating a scoring model for assessing risk of disease recurrence in resected breast cancer patients, candidate to systemic chemotherapy. This finding stimulates future investigations addressing the role of plasma prothrombin fragment 1+2 in the management of breast cancer patients to provide the rationale for new therapeutic strategies. (The HYPERCAN study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier 02622815).

A novel circulating tumor cell subpopulation for treatment monitoring and molecular characterization in biliary tract cancer.

In biliary tract cancer (BTC), tissue biopsies to guide treatment are rarely feasible, thus implementing liquid biopsy approaches to improve patient management represents a priority. So far, studies on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in BTC are insufficient to promote their use in patient clinical management and are limited to EpCAM-enriched CTCs evaluated with the CellSearch. We applied a single-cell protocol allowing identification not only of epithelial CTCs (eCTCs), but also of nonconventional CTCs (ncCTCs) lacking epithelial and leukocyte markers, but presenting aberrant genomes as confirmed by copy number alterations and therefore representing a distinct subpopulation of bona fide CTCs. In 41 blood samples longitudinally collected from 21 patients with advanced-stage BTC, addition of ncCTC to classic eCTC led to a CTC-positivity increase from 19% to 83%. Patients presenting with at least 1 eCTC/10 ml of blood at baseline prior to treatment start had a significantly shorter median disease-specific survival (DSS) compared to those lacking eCTCs (9 months vs. 19 months, p = 0.03 by log-rank test). No differences in DSS were observed according to ncCTC-positivity, conversely, variations in ncCTC counts during, and at the end of treatment, were associated with the RECIST response supporting their role in treatment monitoring. Moreover, in 88 ncCTCs collected at different times during treatment, unsupervised clustering evidenced segregation of cells by patient's best response, allowing identification of genomic regions possibly involved in resistance mechanisms. The presence of ncCTCs beside eCTCs opens the way to exploiting liquid biopsy for optimizing clinical management in BTC.

Every-other-day palonosetron plus aprepitant for prevention of emesis following induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia: A randomized, controlled study from the "Rete Ematologica Pugliese".

BACKGROUND: Compared with older 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, palonosetron requires fewer drug administrations to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following multiple-day chemotherapy. We conducted a phase II multicenter study comparing palonosetron plus aprepitant to palonosetron alone in patients undergoing a range of induction chemotherapy regimens for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). METHODS: Patients were randomized to palonosetron (0.25 mg) every other day until the last dose of chemotherapy alone or with aprepitant on days 1-3. Patients mainly received an anthracycline on days 1-3 plus cytarabine administered for 5-10 days. The primary end point was complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medication) over the whole study period (days of chemotherapy plus two additional days). Unplanned analysis of time to anti-emetic treatment failure (TTF) was also performed. RESULTS: Of the 134 patients enrolled in the study, 130 were evaluable: 68 subjects received palonosetron plus aprepitant and 62 received palonosetron alone. Although the primary end point of CR was similar between the treatment arms (72% vs 69%; P = .55), a higher proportion of patients treated with palonosetron plus aprepitant were free from nausea during the whole study period (43% vs 27%; P = .03). There was also a significant difference in favor of the two-drug regimens in TTF (median: 5 days vs 3 days; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that every-other-day palonosetron plus 3-day aprepitant can add clinical benefit to the control of CINV caused by multiple-day, corticosteroid-free chemotherapy for AML. In this challenging setting of CINV, further investigations of palonosetron in combination with aprepitant administered with an expanded schedule are warranted. ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT02205164.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists: review of their role for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults.

Introduction: The addition of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) to standard prophylaxis of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 RA (5-HT3RA) plus dexamethasone more effectively prevents chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Areas covered: This review presents the evidence base for the use of oral and intravenous (IV) NK1RAs, focusing on the pharmacologic and clinical properties as a class, and highlighting differences between agents. A PubMed literature search was conducted from 2000 to 2018. Expert opinion: Adherence to international antiemetic guidelines remains a clinical challenge. Strategies to simplify antiemetic regimens and facilitate their administration may improve compliance and treatment outcomes. The use of fixed-combination antiemetics offers clinical utility, in combining an NK1RA with a 5-HT3RA in a single oral dose. The use of long-lasting NK1RAs and administering CINV prophylaxis closer to the time of chemotherapy may also assist with guideline and treatment compliance, diminishing the need for home-based administration, and potentially reducing resource utilization. The availability of IV and oral formulations of NK1RAs and NK1RA-5-HT3RA fixed combinations offers further utility, particularly for those patients unsuited for oral administration. However, safety considerations with respect to injection site toxicity and hypersensitivity reactions of the new NK1RA IV formulations deserve close attention.