Does patient sex affect the treatment outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors? A Danish, observational melanoma study.

AIM: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether patient biological sex influences treatment outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma (MM) undergoing first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. METHODS: The Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED) was employed to identify patients who underwent first-line ICI therapy for MM in Denmark from 2013 to 2021. Excluding adjuvant treatment, uveal and mucosal histological subtypes, the study conducted univariable and multivariable analyses to evaluate the influence of patient sex in survival analyses. Further, landmark survival of this real-world national cohort was described for progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS). RESULTS: The analysis encompassed a cohort of 1378 patients with MM. Compared to male sex, females had significantly improved OS (p = 0.003) when tested in univariable testing. Multivariable analyses, controlling for age, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase level, BRAF status, M-stage, and number of metastatic sites revealed significant favourable outcomes associated with female sex irrespective of the considered survival metrics (pPFS = 0.014, pOS = 0.002, and pMSS = 0.03). The observed five-year OS rates of the entire cohort were 47% and 38%, while melanoma-specific survival were 50% and 45% for female and male, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide cohort of patients with MM undergoing first-line ICI treatment females exhibited superior treatment outcomes compared to males. Sex was identified as an independent predictive variable for treatment outcomes, irrespective of the chosen outcome measures considered. Our analyses are not able to conclude whether the differences in outcome is attributable to differences in biology or to treatment strategy.

Frequency and characteristics of immune-related thyroid adverse events in patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma treated with adjuvant PD-1 inhibitors: a national cohort study.

PURPOSE: Immune-related thyroid adverse events (irTAEs) occur frequently following immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. The purpose of this study is to provide knowledge about the incidence, clinical timeline characteristics, associated factors of irTAEs, and potential impact on treatment efficacy in patients with melanoma receiving adjuvant ICI therapy. METHODS: A national multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma treated with adjuvant PD-1 inhibitors between November 2018 and December 2020. Data were extracted from the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database. The irTAEs were defined as two consecutive abnormal TSH values and subdivided into transient or persistent. RESULTS: Of 454 patients, 99 developed an irTAE (21.8%), of these were 46 transient (46.5%) and 53 persistent (53.5%). Median time to transient and persistent irTAE was 55 and 44 days, respectively (p = 0.57). A hyperthyroid phase followed by hypothyroidism was seen in 73.6% of persistent irTAEs, whereas 87% of transient irTAEs developed an isolated hypo- or hyperthyroid phase. Multiple variable analysis demonstrated an association between irTAE and female sex (HR 2.45; 95% CI 1.63-3.70; p < 0.001), but no association with recurrence-free survival (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.50-1.48; p = 0.587) or overall survival (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.52-2.12, p = 0.891). CONCLUSIONS: IrTAE is a common side effect to PD-1 inhibitors primarily occurring within the first 3 months, with a high risk of persistency. Female sex is a strong predictive factor. IrTAE was not associated with improved clinical outcome.

Organ-specific accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in identifying immune-related adverse events in patients with high-risk melanoma treated with adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the organ-specific accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in identifying immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients with high-risk (stage III/IV) surgically resected melanoma treated with an adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and determine the incidence of irAEs within the first year after starting treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This registry-based study included individuals who had undergone surgical removal of melanoma and were undergoing adjuvant ICI treatment (either nivolumab or pembrolizumab). The study specifically enrolled patients who had undergone both a baseline and at least one subsequent follow-up [18F]FDG-PET/CT scan. Follow-up scans were performed every third month in the first year after surgery to screen for disease recurrence. We retrospectively compared the follow-up scans with baseline scans to identify irAEs. Clinical information on irAEs was obtained from medical records and served as a reference standard for determining the accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients with 363 [18F]FDG-PET/CT scans were included, and 65 patients (52.8%) developed irAEs. In decreasing order, the organ-specific incidences of irAEs were: skin 26/65 (40%), muscle and joints 21/65 (32.3%), intestines 13/65 (20%), thyroid gland 12/65 (18.5%), lungs 4/65 (6.2%), and heart 2/65 (3.1%). The sensitivities and specificities of [18F]FDG-PET/CT for diagnosing irAEs were: skin 19% (95% CI: 7-39%) and 95% (88-98%), muscles and joints 71% (48-89%) and 83% (75-90%), intestines 100% (75-100%) and 85% (77-91%); thyroid gland 92% (62-99%) and 95% (89-98%), lungs 75% (19-99%) and 90% (83-95%), and heart 50% (13-99%) and 97% (92-99%), respectively. CONCLUSION: [18F]FDG-PET/CT generally had moderate to high sensitivities (except for skin and heart) and specificities in diagnosing irAEs in patients receiving adjuvant ICI; this could be suggested to be systematically assessed and reported in scan reports.

Outcome of adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world nation-wide cohort of patients with melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated promising outcomes for adjuvant immunotherapy in patients with resected melanoma. Real-life data provide valuable insights to support patient guidance and treatment decisions. METHODS: Observational population-based study examining a national cohort of patients with resected stage III-IV melanoma referred for adjuvant therapy. Data were extracted from the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 785 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1. The majority had stage III resected melanoma (87%), normal LDH levels (80%), and performance score 0 (87%). Patients were followed for a median of 25.6 months (95%CI 24-28). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were not reached. The RFS was 78% (95%CI 75-81), 66% (63-70), and 59% (55-63); MSS was 97% (95-98), 93% (91-95), and 87% (84-90) at 1-, 2-, and 3-year; respectively. Less than half (42%) of the patients finalized planned therapy, 32% discontinued due to toxicity, and 19% due to melanoma recurrence. Patients discontinuing adjuvant treatment prematurely, without recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing therapy. In a multivariable analysis, ipilimumab plus nivolumab did not improve outcomes compared to ipilimumab monotherapy as a first-line metastatic treatment after adjuvant anti-PD-1. CONCLUSION: Survival outcomes in real-world patients with melanoma treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 align with results from the randomized controlled trials. Patients discontinuing therapy prematurely, for other reasons than recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing planned treatment. First-line metastatic treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab post-adjuvant anti-PD-1 did not show improved outcomes compared to ipilimumab/anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

Emetic risk classification and evaluation of the emetogenicity of antineoplastic agents-updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendation.

PURPOSE: Our goal was to identify new anticancer agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medical Agency (EMA) since the 2016 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic update and classify their emetic potential. METHODS: The MASCC/ESMO Expert Panel classified the emetogenicity of the identified new antineoplastic agents based on nonsystematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, analysis of product labeling, and evaluation of emetic classification in other international guidelines and informal consensus. The emetogenic classification system for oral anticancer agents was revised into two emetic risk categories (minimal-low; moderate-high) to be consistent with the system reported by ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) in their 2017 guideline update. The previously employed four emetic risk classification categories for intravenously administered antineoplastic agents were retained for this update. RESULTS: From June 2015 to January 2023, 107 new antineoplastic agents (44 intravenously administered and 63 orally administered agents) were identified. The reported incidence of vomiting varied significantly across studies for many agents, especially for oral anticancer agents. CONCLUSION: The MASCC/ESMO Expert Panel acknowledges the limitations of our efforts to classify the emetic potential of anticancer agents, especially the imprecision associated with oral agents. However, we have attempted to provide a reasonable approximation of the emetic risk associated with new antineoplastic agents by searching the available literature and reviewing other available international antiemetic guidelines.

2023 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: prevention of radiotherapy- and chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV and C-RINV) are common and distressing, and there is a need for guidance for clinicians to provide up to date optimal antiemetic prophylaxis and treatment. Through a comprehensive review of the literature concerning RINV and C-RINV, this manuscript aims to update the evidence for antiemetic prophylaxis and rescue therapy and provide a new edition of recommendations for the MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines for RINV and C-RINV. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature including data published from May 1, 2015, to January 31, 2023, was performed. All authors assessed the literature. RESULTS: The searches yielded 343 references; 37 met criteria for full article review, and 20 were ultimately retained. Only one randomized study in chemoradiation had the impact to provide new recommendations for the antiemetic guideline. Based on expert consensus, it was decided to change the recommendation for the "low emetic risk" category from "prophylaxis or rescue" to "rescue" only, while the drugs of choice remain unchanged. CONCLUSION: As for the previous guideline, the serotonin receptor antagonists are still the cornerstone in antiemetic prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by high and moderate emetic risk radiotherapy. The guideline update provides new recommendation for the management of C-RINV for radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin. To avoid overtreatment, antiemetic prophylaxis is no longer recommended for the "low emetic risk" category.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential.

PURPOSE: Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2016 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of low and minimal emetic potential. METHODS: A working group performed a systematic literature review using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases between June 2015 and January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of low or minimal emetic potential. A consensus committee reviewed recommendations and required a consensus of 67% or greater and a change in outcome of at least 10%. RESULTS: Of 293 papers identified, 15 had information about managing systemic cancer treatment regimens of low or minimal emetic potential and/or compliance with previous management recommendations. No new evidence was reported that would change the current MASCC recommendations. No antiemetic prophylaxis is recommended for minimal emetic potential therapy, and single agents recommended for low emetic potential chemotherapy for acute emesis, but no prophylaxis is recommended for delayed emesis. Commonly, rescue medication includes antiemetics prescribed for the next higher level of emesis. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient data to change the current guidelines. Future studies should seek to more accurately determine the risk of emesis with LEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy to include patient-related risk assessment.

A national repository of complete radiotherapy plans: design, Results, and experiences.

BACKGROUND: Previously, many radiotherapy (RT) trials were based on a few selected dose measures. Many research questions, however, rely on access to the complete dose information. To support such access, a national RT plan database was created. The system focuses on data security, ease of use, and re-use of data. This article reports on the development and structure, and the functionality and experience of this national database. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A system based on the DICOM-RT standard, DcmCollab, was implemented with direct connections to all Danish RT centres. Data is segregated into any number of collaboration projects. User access to the system is provided through a web interface. The database has a finely defined access permission model to support legal requirements. RESULTS: Currently, data for more than 14,000 patients have been submitted to the system, and more than 50 research projects are registered. The system is used for data collection, trial quality assurance, and audit data set generation.Users reported that the process of submitting data, waiting for it to be processed, and then manually attaching it to a project was resource intensive. This was accommodated with the introduction of triggering features, eliminating much of the need for users to manage data manually. Many other features, including structure name mapping, RT plan viewer, and the Audit Tool were developed based on user input. CONCLUSION: The DcmCollab system has provided an efficient means to collect and access complete datasets for multi-centre RT research. This stands in contrast with previous methods of collecting RT data in multi-centre settings, where only singular data points were manually reported. To accommodate the evolving legal environment, DcmCollab has been defined as a 'data processor', meaning that it is a tool for other research projects to use rather than a research project in and of itself.

Quality of life and mental health in real-world patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma receiving adjuvant immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has expanded into the adjuvant setting enhancing the importance of knowledge on the immune-related toxicities and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Large phase 3 trials of patients with resected Stage III/IV melanoma found no effect on HRQoL during adjuvant immunotherapy. This study investigates how HRQoL was affected during and after adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients with resected melanoma treated with adjuvant nivolumab from 2018 to 2021 in Denmark were identified using the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). The study was performed as a nationwide cross-sectional analysis as a questionnaire consisting of six different validated questionnaires on HRQoL, cognitive function, fatigue, depression, fear of recurrence, and decision regret was sent to all patients in March 2021. To evaluate HRQoL during and after adjuvant treatment, patients were divided into groups depending on their treatment status when answering the questionnaire; patients in active treatment for 0-6 months, patients in active treatment for >6 months, patients who ended treatment 0-6 months ago, and patients who ended treatment >6 months ago. RESULTS: A total of 271/412 (66%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago had the lowest HRQoL and had more fatigue. Patients in active treatment for >6 months had lower HRQoL and more fatigue than patients who started treatment 0-6 months ago. Patients ending therapy >6 months ago had higher HRQoL and less fatigue compared to patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago. Multivariable analysis showed an association between HRQoL and treatment status, comorbidity, civil status, and employment status. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant nivolumab may affect some aspects of QoL, but the influence seems temporary. Patient characteristics, such as civil status, employment status, and comorbidity were associated with HRQoL.

Cannabis use among Danish patients with cancer: a cross-sectional survey of sociodemographic traits, quality of life, and patient experiences.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are using cannabis for self-treatment. The reasons, experienced effects, and prevalence of use are unknown in the European general oncological population. METHODS: Adult patients with cancer attending outpatient oncology clinics were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey. The questionnaire consisted of sociodemographic questions, validated scales on quality of life, neuropathy, anxiety and depression as well as questions regarding use of cannabis. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 83% (2839 patients) and 13% of patients were using or had used cannabis during their treatment. Rate of use was higher in smokers (19% vs 11%, p adjusted 0.002), in patients in active cancer treatment (14% vs 10%, p adjusted = 0.02), and in patients with depression (19% vs 11%, adjusted p = 0.002). Cannabis use was also correlated with lower quality of life (EORTC C30 SumScore mean diff. = - 7.61, 95% CI = [- 9.69; - 5.53]). In total, 77% of users experienced at least one positive effect of cannabis, 18% experienced no effect, and 5% experienced other effects. At least one side effect was experienced by 33% of users. Management of pain and nausea were the primary reasons for initiating cannabis use (39% for both). Less nausea and better sleep were the most common effects experienced (26% for both). Oils for oral use were the most common route of administration (88%). CONCLUSION: Cannabis use among patients with cancer is prevalent and correlated with worse quality of life. Patients report using cannabis for symptom management and many experience relief of their symptoms. However, one third of patients experienced side effects.

Comparison of Efficacy in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Treated with Ipilimumab and Nivolumab Who Did or Did Not Discontinue Treatment Due to Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Real-World Data Study.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are very prevalent when treating patients with ipilimumab and nivolumab in combination, and 30-40% of patients discontinue the treatment for this reason. It is of high clinical relevance to investigate the consequences of discontinuing the treatment early since combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab is the first line of treatment for many patients with metastatic melanoma. In this follow-up study, with real-world data from the nationwide DAMMED database, we investigated whether there was a difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients who discontinued or did not discontinue treatment within the first four doses of treatment due to irAEs. In total, 448 patients were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Of these, 133 patients discontinued due to irAEs in the induction phase. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, there was no significant difference in PFS when comparing the group that discontinued with the group that did not discontinue. The group that discontinued had a significantly longer OS than the group that received the full length of treatment. Therefore, we conclude that there is no significant negative impact on efficacy for patients who discontinue due to irAEs in the induction phase of combination immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma.

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.

2016 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: Controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to update the MASCC (Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer) guidelines for controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential. METHODS: The antiemetic study group of MASCC met in Copenhagen in 2015 to review the MASCC antiemetic guidelines. A subgroup performed a systematic literature review on antiemetics for low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC) and chemotherapy of minimal emetic potential and the chair presented the update recommendation to the whole group for discussion. They then voted with an aim of achieving 67 % or greater consensus. RESULTS: For patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy, a single antiemetic such as dexamethasone, a 5HT3 receptor antagonist, or a dopamine receptor antagonist may be considered for prophylaxis of acute emesis. For patients receiving chemotherapy of minimal emetogenicity, no antiemetic should be routinely administered. If patients vomit, they should be treated as for chemotherapy of low emetic potential. No antiemetic should be administered for prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting induced by low or minimally emetogenic chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed to determine the incidence of emesis, particularly delayed emesis, in the LEC group. Prospective studies are required to evaluate antiemetic strategies. The risk of emesis within LEC may be more accurately determined by adding the patient risk factors for emesis to those of the chemotherapy drugs. Improved strategies for promoting adherence to guidelines are required.

2016 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: prevention of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) are distressing symptoms. Evidence-based guidelines should facilitate the prescription of the best possible antiemetic prophylaxis. As part of the MASCC/ESMO Antiemetic Guidelines Update 2016, a thorough review of the literature concerning RINV since the 2009 update was required. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature including data published from June 2009 to May 2015 was performed. Committee VII (RINV) under the MASCC/ESMO Antiemetic Guidelines Update Committee assessed the literature. RESULTS: The searches yielded 926 records, 906 records were excluded, leaving 20 records for full text assessment, and 18 publications were finally included. The only fully published randomized studies in prevention of RINV were two negative studies in acupuncture and green tea, respectively. No data to support new recommendations for antiemetic prophylaxis in RINV was available. However, based on expert opinions, the committee agreed on changes in emetic risk level for certain sites of irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: The serotonin receptor antagonists are still the corner stone in antiemetic prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by high and moderate emetic risk radiotherapy. The studies available since the last update did not change recommendations for antiemetic prophylaxis. The emetogenicity of craniospinal radiotherapy was reclassified from low to moderate emetic level along with some other minor changes. In the future, RINV prophylaxis in single fraction, multiple fraction, and in concomitant chemo-radiotherapy still need to be explored with regard to the different classes and combinations of antiemetic drugs.

New treatments on the horizon for chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

INTRODUCTION: Antiemetic prophylaxis for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and the development of new antiemetic drugs are expanding areas of research. However, studies of antiemetic prophylaxis in chemoradiotherapy have not been prioritised, and little is known about the proper timing, duration, and combination of antiemetic drugs for the prevention of chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (C-RINV). AREAS COVERED: The article summarises the available antiemetic studies, the evidence for antiemetic prophylaxis of C-RINV, and the future perspectives for antiemetic research in chemoradiotherapy. EXPERT OPINION: Antiemetic prophylaxis for patients receiving concomitant chemoradiotherapy has, for many years, been an orphan research area. The distinction between acute and delayed nausea and vomiting does not apply to fractionated radiotherapy, and prophylaxis should be considered to cover the entire course of treatment and not only the acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The best prophylaxis in women receiving fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin is a combination of the neurokinin receptor antagonist fosaprepitant with palonosetron and dexamethasone. Even with this three-drug combination nausea is a significant problem and the effect of multi-receptor targeting antiemetics such as olanzapine and amisulpride should be explored in this setting.

Efficacy and safety of fosaprepitant for the prevention of nausea and emesis during 5 weeks of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer (the GAND-emesis study): a multinational, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of the neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists in the prevention of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting has not been established. The purpose of the GAND-emesis study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of fosaprepitant in combination with palonosetron and dexamethasone in the prevention of nausea and vomiting during 5 weeks of fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin in patients with cervical cancer. METHODS: This investigator initiated, multinational, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, included women with cervical cancer scheduled to receive fractionated radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) for 5 weeks. Patients had to be naive to chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either single doses of fosaprepitant 150 mg intravenously or placebo (saline) in combination with palonosetron 0·25 mg intravenously and dexamethasone 16 mg orally before cisplatin administration. Randomisation was done by the unmasked pharmacist, who used a list of six numbers (a block) provided in a sealed envelope. A web-based randomisation number generator was used to generate the full list of randomisation numbers that was split up in blocks of six numbers. All patients received oral dexamethasone 8 mg twice a day on day 2, 4 mg twice a day on day 3, and 4 mg once on day 4. The treatment was repeated for 5 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained no emesis after 5 weeks of treatment. The modified intention-to-treat population (all patients who received study medication) was used for the statistical analyses. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01074697. FINDINGS: Between June 15, 2010, and March 8, 2015, 246 patients from four countries consented to the study and were randomly assigned. Of these, 234 patients were eligible, having received study medication (118 received fosaprepitant, 116 received placebo). The proportion of patients with sustained no emesis at 5 weeks (competing risk analysis) was 48·7% (95% CI 25·2-72·2) for the placebo group compared with 65·7% (42·2-89·2) of patients for the fosaprepitant group. There was a significantly lower cumulative risk of emesis in the fosaprepitant group compared with the placebo group (subhazard ratio 0·58 [95% CI 0·39-0·87]; p=0·008). Treatments were generally well tolerated with few grade 3 adverse events none of which were related to the study treatment; the most common grade 3 adverse event during the 5 weeks of treatment was diarrhoea (11 [9%] of 118 patients in the fosaprepitant group vs six [5%] of 116 patients in the placebo group). There was only one report of a grade 4 adverse event (neutropenia), in the fosaprepitant group. No deaths were recorded in either group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate safety and efficacy of a NK-1 receptor antagonist during 5 weeks of radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin. Patients receiving fosaprepitant in addition to palonosetron and dexamethasone were less likely to experience emesis and nausea compared with those receiving palonosetron and dexamethasone alone. Both treatments were safe and well tolerated. Further investigations in other radiotherapy settings are warranted. FUNDING: Private and hospital or university funding, unrestricted grants from Biovitrum and Helsinn Healthcare SA.

Multinational study exploring patients' perceptions of side-effects induced by chemo-radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: We aimed to prospectively assess the incidence, severity and patients' perceptions of side-effects induced by radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multinational survey included patients with a diagnosis of gynaecological or head and neck cancer scheduled to receive radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin. Patients completed a questionnaire prior to anti-cancer treatment and after 3 weeks of treatment. Baseline frequency and severity of symptoms were compared to frequency and severity after 3 weeks of treatment, and patients were asked to rank the five most severe symptoms experienced. RESULTS: An increase in the severity as well as in the mean number of symptoms (18 compared to 24) was observed during treatment. Patients ranked 7 of the 10 most feared baseline symptoms as non-physical, whereas 8 of the 10 most feared symptoms after 3 weeks of treatment were physical. Nausea was ranked as the 5th most severe symptom during treatment, despite 98% of patients receiving antiemetic prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Patients with head and neck cancer or gynaecological cancer suffer from a number of primarily non-physical symptoms before starting combined chemo-radiotherapy. After 3 weeks of treatment patients score 8 of the 10 most feared symptoms as physical. Future trials focusing on the prevention of side-effects in patients receiving radiotherapy and concomitant chemotherapy are highly warranted.

Palonosetron and prednisolone for the prevention of nausea and emesis during fractionated radiotherapy and 5 cycles of concomitant weekly cisplatin-a phase II study.

PURPOSE: Recommendations for antiemetic prophylaxis supportive to radiotherapy and concomitant chemotherapy are not evidence-based. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the antiemetic regimen concurrent to fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin in two Danish departments of oncology. METHODS: Patients with gynecological cancer scheduled to receive fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m(2)) were asked to complete a study diary in order to assess episodes of emesis, grade of nausea, and use of rescue antiemetic treatment daily during 5 weeks of treatment. Antiemetic treatment consisted of palonosetron and prednisolone. A patient had completed the study if emesis occurred or if 5 weeks of treatment were accomplished without emesis. The primary endpoint was sustained no emesis during 5 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients completed 155 weekly cycles of radiotherapy, concomitant weekly cisplatin, and antiemetic prophylaxis. The probability of completing 5 cycles without emesis (sustained no emesis) was 57 %. During cycle 1, 42 % of the patients were free from nausea. After 5 cycles, only 23 % of patients were continuously free from nausea. One half of the patients used rescue antiemetic treatment at least once during the 5 cycles. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that an antiemetic prophylaxis consisting of palonosetron and prednisolone is insufficient for the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin in patients treated for gynecological cancer. The addition of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist should be investigated in a randomized, double-blind study in this setting.

Fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

For patients receiving cancer chemotherapy, the ongoing development of antiemetic treatment is of significant importance. Patients consider nausea and vomiting among the most distressing symptoms of chemotherapy, and as new antiemetics have been very successful in prevention of vomiting, agents effective against nausea have become one of the major unmet needs. The neurokinin (NK)(1) receptor antagonist aprepitant potentiates the antiemetic efficacy of the combination of a serotonin receptor antagonist and a corticosteroid. Fosaprepitant (intravenous prodrug of aprepitant) given as a single intravenous dose of 150 mg can replace the aprepitant 3-day oral regimen. This article focuses on the development and clinical application of fosaprepitant.