The efficacy and safety of the addition of olanzapine to ondansetron and dexamethasone for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of olanzapine to ondansetron and dexamethasone for chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting (CINV) prevention in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, we randomly assigned chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving HEC to receive olanzapine or placebo in addition to ondansetron and dexamethasone. All subjects were crossed over to another treatment arm on second-cycle chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue drugs. RESULTS: At the first cycle, there were significantly more patients with CR in the olanzapine group than in the placebo group in overall phase (68.7% vs. 25.0%, p < 0.001), acute phase (0-24 h) (75.0% vs. 31.2%, p < 0.001) and delayed phase (24-120 h) (68.7% vs. 43.7%, p = 0.038). After crossover, there were significantly more patients with CR in the olanzapine group than in the placebo group in overall phase (67.2% vs. 25.0%, p < 0.001), acute phase (71.9% vs. 32.8%, p < 0.001) and delayed phase (67.2% vs. 37.5%, p < 0.001). In crossover analysis, the olanzapine group had significantly lower mean nausea (1.28 vs. 3.05, p < 0.001) and fatigue (3.5 vs. 4.58, p < 0.001) scores but higher mean appetite (2.5 vs. 1.55, p = 0.003) and sleepiness (3.26 vs. 2.2, p < 0.001) scores. There were no grade 3 and 4 anti-emetic-drug-related toxicities. Mean QT interval changes did not different between two groups (-4.30 vs. -1.86, p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: The addition of olanzapine to ondansetron and dexamethasone significantly improved CINV prevention and was safe in patients receiving HEC.

Concordance between whole exome sequencing of circulating tumor DNA and tumor tissue.

Next generation sequencing of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been used as a noninvasive alternative for cancer diagnosis and characterization of tumor mutational landscape. However, low ctDNA fraction and other factors can limit the ability of ctDNA analysis to capture tumor-specific and actionable variants. In this study, whole-exome sequencings (WES) were performed on paired ctDNA and tumor biopsy in 15 cancer patients to assess the extent of concordance between mutational profiles derived from the two source materials. We found that up to 16.4% ctDNA fraction can still be insufficient for detecting tumor-specific variants and that good concordance with tumor biopsy is consistently achieved at higher ctDNA fractions. Most importantly, ctDNA analysis can consistently capture tumor heterogeneity and detect key cancer-related genes even in a patient with both primary and metastatic tumors.

Effects of Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Chemotherapy Delivery in Thai Patients.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is widely used among cancer patients worldwide. This prospective observational study aimed to show the effect of CAM use on chemotherapy delivery in Thai patients. METHODS: During March 2014 to February 2015, the patients with breast, lung or colorectal cancer receiving first cycle chemotherapy at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital were enrolled. The correlation between CAM using and chemotherapy schedule delay and dose reduction, dose intensity, quality of life and adverse event rates were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 80 (44.20%) patients using CAM among 181 enrolled patients.  Seventy six CAM users and 97 non-CAM users receiving 2nd cycle of chemotherapy were included for primary analysis. The chemotherapy schedules were delayed and/or reduced in 40 (52.6%) and 48 (49.5%) in CAM users and non-CAM users, respectively, p =0.681. The mean relative dose intensity (RDI) were 92.4% and 94.1% in CAM and non-CAM users, respectively, p=0.244. However, there were significantly more CAM users receiving chemotherapy less than 90% RDI (34.8% vs 19.8%, p=0.033). As compared to first cycle, at third cycle, the mean QOL score changes were -4.63 (95% CI -2.49-9.27) and -8.02 (-2.36- 9.142) in CAM user and non-CAM user, respectively (p=0.255). There were significantly higher rates of grade 3 or 4 anemia (5.1% vs 0%, p=0.024), and grade 2 malaise (19.0% vs 5.1%, p=0.004) in CAM users. CONCLUSIONS: There were similar overall rates of chemotherapy schedule delay and dose reduction between CAM- and non-CAM users. However, there were less CAM-users achieving 90% chemotherapy RDI.