Penehyclidine hydrochloride improves cognitive function of rats with brain injury via CAMP/CREB signaling pathway.

This study explored the impact of penehyclidine hydrochloride on cognitive function in rats with brain injury. Sprague-Dawley rats (n=36) were randomly assigned to sham-operation, model, and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups. Rats in the sham-operation group underwent craniotomy, while the model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups received brain injury models and interventions with normal saline and penehyclidine hydrochloride, respectively. Specimens were obtained two weeks post-intervention. Neurological deficits were evaluated using Zea-Longa scores, and memory was assessed with the Morris water maze test. ELISA determined brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and nerve growth factor (NGF) content. mRNA expressions of BDNF and NGF were assessed via qPCR, and phosphorylated CREB (p-CREB) protein expression was measured by Western blotting. Compared to the sham-operation group, both model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups showed increased Zea-Longa scores. Escape latencies were longer and platform crossings were fewer in model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups compared to the sham-operation group, but penehyclidine hydrochloride demonstrated a shorter latency and more platform crossings than the model group. BDNF and NGF content decreased in model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups compared to the sham-operation group, with an increase in the penehyclidine hydrochloride group compared to the model group. mRNA expression levels declined in model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups but were higher in the latter. p-CREB protein expression was lower in model and penehyclidine hydrochloride groups compared to the sham-operation group but higher in the penehyclidine hydrochloride group than the model group. Penehyclidine hydrochloride exhibited neuroprotective effects by upregulating the cAMP/CREB signaling pathway, improving cognitive function in rats with brain injury.

Evaluation of Efficacy of Adding Aprepitant to Palonosetron and Dexamethasone in Carboplatin and Etoposide Therapy.

Although carboplatin (CBDCA) is classified as a moderately emetogenic agent, the majority of guidelines recommend the use of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist in addition to a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist with dexamethasone (DEX) for CBDCA-containing chemotherapy because of its higher emetogenic risk. However, the additional efficacy of aprepitant (APR) in CBDCA-containing treatment remains controversial, and data on multiple-day treatments are limited. Etoposide (ETP) was administered on days 1-3 in the CBDCA + ETP regimen, and it is important to evaluate suitable antiemetic therapy for the regimen. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of additional APR in CBDCA + ETP. Patients were divided into two groups and retrospectively evaluated. One was the control group, which was prophylactically administered palonosetron (PALO) and DEX, and the other was the APR group, which received APR orally with PALO and DEX. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) between the groups. The overall CR rates were 75.0 and 76.4% in the control and APR groups, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 1.00). In the acute phase, it was 88.9 and 97.2%, respectively, and 86.1 and 79.2% in the delayed phase, respectively, without significant differences (p = 0.10 and 0.38, respectively). The incidence and severity of nausea, vomiting, and anorexia were not significantly different between the two groups in the acute and delayed phases. Our findings suggest that combining APR with PALO and DEX does not improve the CR rate in CBDCA + ETP therapy.

A phase II trial of netupitant/palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting in patients receiving BEAM prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) patients receiving BEAM therapy. Study Design: This phase II, prospective, intention-to-treat, single-center, single-arm study involved 43 adult patients who received NEPA and dexamethasone for the prevention of CINV due to BEAM conditioning chemotherapy. An interim analysis, performed after 13 patients, determined utility versus futility, and supported continuation to full enrollment. Descriptive statistics were used to report complete response (CR), complete protection, incidence of emesis, and administration of rescue agents. A Kaplan-Meier curve depicted time to first emesis and first rescue medication. Patients self-reported levels of daily nausea descriptively via a CINV Questionnaire. Results: By study end, 13 of 43 patients achieved a CR with an average of 10.6 emesis-free days (SD 0.95) over the 11-day observation period, with no emetic events in any patient during the acute/chemotherapy phase. Nausea was well-controlled throughout the acute therapy phase (Day 1-6) and increased during the delayed phase (Day 7-11) with a peak mean level of 2.79/10 at Day 10. Aside from lower grade (≤2), headaches, constipation, and diarrhea were the most widely reported adverse effects. Conclusion: The combination of NEPA and dexamethasone is safe and effective for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving BEAM conditioning therapy prior to HCT. The regimen demonstrated greater effectiveness in the acute phase versus the delayed phase, with low levels of nausea throughout the study period and complete emesis prevention during chemotherapy.

Alpha 7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Agonist PHA 568487 Reduces Acute Inflammation but Does Not Affect Cardiac Function or Myocardial Infarct Size in the Permanent Occlusion Model.

Stimulation of the alpha 7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR) has shown beneficial effects in several acute inflammatory disease models. This study aims to examine whether treatment with the selective α7nAChR agonist PHA 568487 can dampen inflammation and thereby improve cardiac function after myocardial infarction in mice. The possible anti-inflammatory properties of α7nAChR agonist PHA 568487 were tested in vivo using the air pouch model and in a permanent occlusion model of acute myocardial infarction in mice. Hematologic parameters and cytokine levels were determined. Infarct size and cardiac function were assessed via echocardiography 24 h and one week after the infarction. Treatment with α7nAChR agonist PHA 568487 decreased 12 (CCL27, CXCL5, IL6, CXCL10, CXCL11, CXCL1, CCL2, MIP1a, MIP2, CXCL16, CXCL12 and CCL25) out of 33 cytokines in the air pouch model of acute inflammation. However, α7nAChR agonist PHA 568487 did not alter infarct size, ejection fraction, cardiac output or stroke volume at 24 h or at 7 days after the myocardial infarction compared with control mice. In conclusion, despite promising immunomodulatory effects in the acute inflammatory air pouch model, α7nAChR agonist PHA 568487 did not affect infarct size or cardiac function after a permanent occlusion model of acute myocardial infarction in mice. Consequently, this study does not strengthen the hypothesis that stimulation of the α7nAChR is a future treatment strategy for acute myocardial infarction when reperfusion is lacking. However, whether other agonists of the α7nAChR can have different effects remains to be investigated.

Targeting p53 for the treatment of cancer.

Dysfunction of the TP53 (p53) gene occurs in most if not all human malignancies. Two principal mechanisms are responsible for this dysfunction; mutation and downregulation of wild-type p53 mediated by MDM2/MDM4. Because of its almost universal inactivation in malignancy, p53 is a highly attractive target for the development of new anticancer drugs. Although multiple strategies have been investigated for targeting dysfunctional p53 for cancer treatment, only 2 of these have so far yielded compounds for testing in clinical trials. These strategies include the identification of compounds for reactivating the mutant form of p53 back to its wild-type form and compounds for inhibiting the interaction between wild-type p53 and MDM2/MDM4. Currently, multiple p53-MDM2/MDM4 antagonists are undergoing clinical trials, the most advanced being idasanutlin which is currently undergoing testing in a phase III clinical trial in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Two mutant p53-reactivating compounds have progressed to clinical trials, i.e., APR-246 and COTI-2. Although promising data has emerged from the testing of both MDM2/MDM4 inhibitors and mutant p53 reactivating compounds in preclinical models, it is still unclear if these agents have clinical efficacy. However, should any of the compounds currently being evaluated in clinical trials be shown to have efficacy, it is likely to usher in a new era in cancer treatment, especially as p53 dysfunction is so prevalent in human cancers.

Antiemetic use and chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting related hospitalization costs after highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Aim: Despite numerous available antiemetics, chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) still affects many patients, and CINV related hospitalizations and costs often result. Materials & methods: PrecisionQ analyzed its database to evaluate CINV related hospitalizations and costs following antiemetics use including netupitant/fosnetupitant with palonosetron (NEPA), aprepitant/fosaprepitant with ondansetron (APON) or aprepitant/fosaprepitant with palonosetron (APPA) in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Results: Database analysis identified 15,583 patient records (807 NEPA, 2023 APON, 12,753 APPA) and mean CINV related hospitalization costs were lower across all patients receiving NEPA (US$301) compared with patients receiving APON ($1006, p < 0.0001) or APPA ($321, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: NEPA is associated with lower CINV related hospitalization costs compared with APON and APPA among patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy patients often experience nausea and vomiting that not only has a negative impact on the patient's quality of life but can also result in unplanned hospitalizations with high associated costs. Numerous medications and specific guidelines are available to prevent nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer. Specifically, the combination of two classes of medications (serotonin inhibitors + neurokinin type 1 inhibitors) has been shown to provide the greatest benefit. However, hospitalizations due to nausea and vomiting still occur, and providers require further information to determine the best options for their patients. In this study, the combination of netupitant/fosnetupitant with palonosetron resulted in lower hospitalization costs compared with aprepitant/fosaprepitant with ondansetron or aprepitant/fosaprepitant with palonosetron in chemotherapy patients.

Palonosetron for prevention of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common adverse events in patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy. Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), has demonstrated non-inferiority to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs for CINV in pediatric patients. Although palonosetron has a long half-life and prolonged antiemetic action, its efficacy against delayed CINV in pediatric patients is not well understood. Therefore, this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate the efficacy of palonosetron for delayed CINV in pediatric patients. METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was performed. A meta-analysis was performed using forest plots, and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A funnel plot was constructed to explore publication bias. RESULTS: The literature search retrieved 842 records, of which 23 full-text articles were assessed, including six RCTs. Meta-analysis of four RCTs that reported on the complete response (CR: defined as no emesis and no rescue medication) rate for delayed CINV revealed that palonosetron was statistically superior to first-generation 5-HT3 RAs (RR = 1.21 [95% CI 1.09-1.35]; p < 0.01). Although the number of studies included was small, no publication bias was observed in the funnel plots. In addition, the CR rate for overall and acute CINV was also significantly higher for palonosetron (RR = 1.25 [95% CI 1.01-1.54]; p = 0.04 and RR = 1.06 [95% CI 1.01-1.12]; p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Palonosetron is effective in the prophylaxis of delayed CINV in pediatric patients.

Effects of penehyclidine hydrochloride combined with dexmedetomidine on pulmonary function in patients undergoing heart valve surgery: a double-blind, randomized trial.

AIM: To investigate the effects of penehyclidine hydrochloride combined with dexmedetomidine on pulmonary function in patients undergoing heart valve surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). METHODS: A total of 180 patients undergoing elective heart valve surgery with CPB were randomly divided into four groups: 45 in group P (intravenous penehyclidine hydrochloride 0.02 mg/kg 10 min before anesthesia induction and at the beginning of CPB, total 0.04 mg/kg); 43 in group D (dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg/h after induction of anesthesia until the end of anesthesia); 44 in group PD ( penehyclidine hydrochloride 0.04 mg/kg combined with dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg/h intravenously during anesthesia); and 43 in group C (same amount of normal saline 10 min before and after anesthesia induction, to the end of anesthesia, and at the beginning of CPB). The main outcomes were the incidence and severity of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The secondary outcomes were: (1) extubation time, length of stay in intensive care, and postoperative hospital stay, and adverse events; and (2) pulmonary function evaluation indices (oxygenation index and respiratory index) and plasma inflammatory factor concentrations (tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, C-reactive protein and procalcitonin) during the perioperative period. RESULTS: The incidence of PPCs in groups P, D and PD after CPB was lower than that in group C (P < 0.05), and the incidence in group PD was significantly lower than that in groups P and D (P < 0.05). The scores for PPCs in groups P, D and PD were lower than those in group C (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Combined use of penehyclidine hydrochloride and dexmedetomidine during anesthesia reduced the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary dysfunction, and improved the prognosis of patients undergoing heart valve surgery with CPB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 3/11/2020 (Registration No.: ChiCTR2000039610).

Evidence for Alpha7 Nicotinic Receptor Activation During the Cough Suppressing Effects Induced by Nicotine and Identification of ATA-101 as a Potential Novel Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Cough.

Studies performed in healthy smokers have documented a diminished responsiveness to tussive challenges, and several lines of experimental evidence implicate nicotine as an antitussive component in both cigarette smoke and the vapors generated by electronic cigarettes (eCigs). We set out to identify the nicotinic receptor subtype involved in the antitussive actions of nicotine and to further evaluate the potential of nicotinic receptor-selective agonists as cough-suppressing therapeutics. We confirmed an antitussive effect of nicotine in guinea pigs. We additionally observed that the alpha-4 beta-2 (α 4 ß 2)-selective agonist Tc-6683 was without effect on evoked cough responses in guinea pigs, while the α 7-selective agonist PHA 543613 dose-dependently inhibited evoked coughing. We subsequently describe the preclinical evidence in support of ATA-101, a potent and highly selective (α 7) selective nicotinic receptor agonist, as a potential candidate for antitussive therapy in humans. ATA-101, formerly known as Tc-5619, was orally bioavailable and moderately central nervous system (CNS) penetrant and dose-dependently inhibited coughing in guinea pigs evoked by citric acid and bradykinin. Comparing the effects of airway targeted administration versus systemic dosing and the effects of repeated dosing at various times prior to tussive challenge, our data suggest that the antitussive actions of ATA-101 require continued engagement of α 7 nicotinic receptors, likely in the CNS. Collectively, the data provide the preclinical rationale for α 7 nicotinic receptor engagement as a novel therapeutic strategy for cough suppression. The data also suggest that α 7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) activation by nicotine may be permissive to nicotine delivery in a way that may promote addiction. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This study documents the antitussive actions of nicotine and identifies the α7 nicotinic receptor subtype as the target for nicotine during cough suppression described in humans. We additionally present evidence suggesting that ATA-101 and other α7 nicotinic receptor-selective agonists may be promising candidates for the treatment of chronic refractory cough.

APR-246 induces early cell death by ferroptosis in acute myeloid leukemia.

APR-246 is a promising new therapeutic agent that targets p53 mutated proteins in myelodysplastic syndromes and in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). APR-246 reactivates the transcriptional activity of p53 mutants by facilitating their binding to DNA target sites. Recent studies in solid cancers have found that APR-246 can also induce p53-independent cell death. In this study, we demonstrate that AML cell death occurring early after APR-246 exposure is suppressed by iron chelators, lipophilic antioxidants and inhibitors of lipid peroxidation, and correlates with the accumulation of markers of lipid peroxidation, thus fulfilling the definition of ferroptosis, a recently described cell death process. The capacity of AML cells to detoxify lipid peroxides by increasing their cystine uptake to maintain major antioxidant molecule glutathione biosynthesis after exposure to APR-246 may be a key determinant of sensitivity to this compound. The association of APR-246 with induction of ferroptosis (either by pharmacological compounds, or genetic inactivation of SLC7A11 or GPX4) had a synergistic effect on the promotion of cell death, both in vivo and ex vivo.

Prophylactic Penehyclidine Inhalation for Prevention of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in High-risk Patients: A Double-blind Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications are common. Aging and respiratory disease provoke airway hyperresponsiveness, high-risk surgery induces diaphragmatic dysfunction, and general anesthesia contributes to atelectasis and peripheral airway injury. This study therefore tested the hypothesis that inhalation of penehyclidine, a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, reduces the incidence of pulmonary complications in high-risk patients over the initial 30 postoperative days. METHODS: This single-center double-blind trial enrolled 864 patients age over 50 yr who were scheduled for major upper-abdominal or noncardiac thoracic surgery lasting 2 h or more and who had an Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score of 45 or higher. The patients were randomly assigned to placebo or prophylactic penehyclidine inhalation from the night before surgery through postoperative day 2 at 12-h intervals. The primary outcome was the incidence of a composite of pulmonary complications within 30 postoperative days, including respiratory infection, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, atelectasis, pneumothorax, bronchospasm, and aspiration pneumonitis. RESULTS: A total of 826 patients (mean age, 64 yr; 63% male) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. A composite of pulmonary complications was less common in patients assigned to penehyclidine (18.9% [79 of 417]) than those receiving the placebo (26.4% [108 of 409]; relative risk, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.93; P = 0.010; number needed to treat, 13). Bronchospasm was less common in penehyclidine than placebo patients: 1.4% (6 of 417) versus 4.4% (18 of 409; relative risk, 0.327; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.82; P = 0.011). None of the other individual pulmonary complications differed significantly. Peak airway pressures greater than 40 cm H2O were also less common in patients given penehyclidine: 1.9% (8 of 432) versus 4.9% (21 of 432; relative risk, 0.381; 95% CI, 0.171 to 0.85; P = 0.014). The incidence of other adverse events, including dry mouth and delirium, that were potentially related to penehyclidine inhalation did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients having major upper-abdominal or noncardiac thoracic surgery, prophylactic penehyclidine inhalation reduced the incidence of pulmonary complications without provoking complications.

Evaluating the effect of anti-nausea drugs in IDO enzyme gene expression and preventing postoperative vomiting and nausea in patients undergoing general anesthesia: A Meta-analysis.

Nausea and vomiting are known as side effects after surgery. Since serotonin antagonist drugs are widely used to prevent nausea and vomiting after surgery, the present study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of this group's drugs, namely, ondansetron and palonosetron. On the other hand, recent studies have shown that the metabolites of the kynurenine pathway in the Suppression of the immune response play a role. Indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase (IDO) is the main enzyme controlling this pathway. Therefore, the effect of these two drugs on IDO gene expression was evaluated. The present study is a systematic review with meta-analysis. The search was conducted in the Cochrane, PubMed, Clinical K, and CRD databases for randomized clinical trial articles that compared two drugs, palonosetron, and ondansetron, regarding nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing surgery with general anesthesia. In the end, eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. STATA13 statistical software was used to estimate the overall risk, relative risk, and data analysis. The results showed that the number of samples in all articles was 739. The analysis of the results between 0 and 24 hours showed that palonosetron reduces the incidence of nausea by 50% and the incidence of vomiting by 79% compared to ondansetron (p=0.001). Also, there was no difference between the IDO gene expression in the two drug groups (p>0.05). In general, the analysis of the results related to the effectiveness of palonosetron and ondansetron 24 hours after surgery with a dose of 0.075 mg of palonosetron versus 4 mg of ondansetron showed that palonosetron is more effective in reducing the incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients than ondansetron.

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 without dexamethasone for preventing nausea and vomiting in patients with multiple myeloma receiving high-dose melphalan for autologous stem cell transplantation: a single-center experience.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most frequent adverse events compromising quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, CINV prophylaxis is still lacking uniformity for high-dose melphalan (HDM), which is used to condition patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) is administered with dexamethasone (DEXA) for CINV prevention in several chemotherapy regimens. Our study aims to assess the efficacy of NEPA, without DEXA, in preventing CINV in 106 adult patients with MM receiving HDM and ASCT. All patients had antiemetic prophylaxis with multiple doses of NEPA 1 h before the start of conditioning and after 72 h and 120 h. A complete response (CR) was observed in 99 (93%) patients at 120 h (overall phase). The percentage of patients with complete control was 93%. The CR rate during the acute phase was 94% (n = 100). During the delayed phase, the CR rate was 95% (n = 101). Grade 1 nausea and vomiting were experienced by 82% and 12% of the patients, respectively. Grade 2 nausea was reported in 18% and vomiting in 10% of patients. Our results showed, for the first time, that NEPA, without DEXA, was a well-tolerated and effective antiemetic option for MM patients receiving HDM followed by ASCT.

Synergistic targeting of CHK1 and mTOR in MYC-driven tumors.

Deregulation of v-myc avian myelocytomatosis viral oncogene homolog (MYC) occurs in a broad range of human cancers and often predicts poor prognosis and resistance to therapy. However, directly targeting oncogenic MYC remains unsuccessful, and indirectly inhibiting MYC emerges as a promising approach. Checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) is a protein kinase that coordinates the G2/M cell cycle checkpoint and protects cancer cells from excessive replicative stress. Using c-MYC-mediated T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia) and N-MYC-driven neuroblastoma as model systems, we reveal that both c-MYC and N-MYC directly bind to the CHK1 locus and activate its transcription. CHIR-124, a selective CHK1 inhibitor, impairs cell viability and induces remarkable synergistic lethality with mTOR inhibitor rapamycin in MYC-overexpressing cells. Mechanistically, rapamycin inactivates carbamoyl-phosphate synthetase 2, aspartate transcarbamoylase, and dihydroorotase (CAD), the essential enzyme for the first three steps of de novo pyrimidine synthesis, and deteriorates CHIR-124-induced replicative stress. We further demonstrate that dual treatments impede T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia and neuroblastoma progression in vivo. These results suggest simultaneous targeting of CHK1 and mTOR as a novel and powerful co-treatment modality for MYC-mediated tumors.

Metoclopramide, Dexamethasone, or Palonosetron for Prevention of Delayed Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting After Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy (MEDEA): A Randomized, Phase III, Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: For the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the delayed phase (24-120 hours) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), the use of 3-day dexamethasone (DEX) is often recommended. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two DEX-sparing regimens with 3-day DEX, focusing on delayed nausea. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, randomized, phase III study was designed to demonstrate noninferiority of two DEX-sparing regimens: ondansetron + DEX on day 1 + metoclopramide on days 2-3 (MCP arm), and palonosetron + DEX on day 1 (PAL arm) versus ondansetron on day 1 + DEX on days 1-3 (DEX arm) in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving MEC. Primary efficacy endpoint was total control (TC; no emetic episodes, no use of rescue medication, no nausea) in the delayed phase. Noninferiority was defined as a lower 95% CI greater than the noninferiority margin set at -20%. Secondary endpoints included no vomiting, no rescue medication, no (significant) nausea, impact of CINV on quality of life, and antiemetics-associated side effects. RESULTS: Treatment arms were comparable for 189 patients analyzed: predominantly male (55.7%), median age 65.0 years, colorectal cancer (85.7%), and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (81.5%). MCP demonstrated noninferiority to DEX for delayed TC (MCP 56.1% vs. DEX 50.0%; 95% CI, -11.3%, 23.5%). PAL also demonstrated noninferiority to DEX (PAL 55.6% vs. DEX 50.0%; 95% CI, -12.0%, 23.2%). There were no statistically significant differences for all secondary endpoints between treatment arms. CONCLUSION: This study showed that DEX-sparing regimens are noninferior to multiple-day DEX in terms of delayed TC rate in patients undergoing MEC. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier. NCT02135510. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in the delayed phase (24-120 hours after chemotherapy) remains one of the most troublesome adverse effects associated with cancer treatment. In particular, delayed nausea is often poorly controlled. The role of dexamethasone (DEX) in the prevention of delayed nausea after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) is controversial. This study is the first to include nausea assessment as a part of the primary study outcome to better gauge the effectiveness of CINV control and patients' experience. Results show that a DEX-sparing strategy does not result in any significant loss of overall antiemetic control: DEX-sparing strategies incorporating palonosetron or multiple-day metoclopramide are safe and at least as effective as standard treatment with a 3-day DEX regimen with ondansetron in controlling delayed CINV-and nausea in particular-following MEC.

A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonists (RAs), administered in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3 ) RA and dexamethasone (DEX), have demonstrated clear improvements in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention over a 5-HT3 RA plus DEX. However, studies comparing the NK1 RAs in the class are lacking. A fixed combination of a highly selective NK1 RA, netupitant, and the 5-HT3 RA, palonosetron (NEPA), simultaneously targets two critical antiemetic pathways, thereby offering a simple convenient antiemetic with long-lasting protection from CINV. This study is the first head-to-head NK1 RA comparative study in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, single-cycle, open-label, prospective study designed to demonstrate noninferiority of single-dose NEPA to a 3-day aprepitant regimen in preventing CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving AC/non-AC MEC in a real-life setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (no emesis/no rescue) during the overall (0-120 hour) phase. Noninferiority was achieved if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference between NEPA and the aprepitant group was greater than the noninferiority margin set at -10%. RESULTS: Noninferiority of NEPA versus aprepitant was demonstrated (risk difference 9.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to 20.7%); the overall complete response rate was numerically higher for NEPA (64.9%) than aprepitant (54.1%). Secondary endpoints also revealed numerically higher rates for NEPA than aprepitant. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic study in patients with cancer receiving AC and non-AC MEC revealed that a single dose of oral NEPA plus DEX was at least as effective as a 3-day aprepitant regimen, with indication of a potential efficacy benefit for NEPA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In the absence of comparative neurokinin 1 (NK1 ) receptor antagonist (RA) studies, guideline committees and clinicians consider NK1 RA agents to be interchangeable and equivalent. This is the first head-to-head study comparing one NK1 RA (oral netupitant/palonosetron [NEPA]) versus another (aprepitant) in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Noninferiority of NEPA versus the aprepitant regimen was demonstrated; the overall complete response (no emesis and no rescue use) rate was numerically higher for NEPA (65%) than aprepitant (54%). As a single-dose combination antiemetic, NEPA not only simplifies dosing but may offer a potential efficacy benefit over the current standard-of-care.

Phase III study of palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Palonosetron has demonstrated non-inferiority to ondansetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients in the United States and Europe. We conducted a single-arm registration study to evaluate the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of palonosetron in pediatric patients in Japan. METHODS: Key inclusion criteria were age of 28 days to 18 years and malignant disease for which initial highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy was planned. Patients received palonosetron at 20 µg/kg over at least 30 s intravenously before the start of highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and received dexamethasone on Days 1-3. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a complete response in the overall phase (0-120 h) in Course 1, and its threshold was set at 30%. RESULTS: From December 2016 to June 2019, 60 patients were enrolled, and 58 received at least one dose of palonosetron. The proportion of patients achieving a complete response during the overall phase was 58.6% (95% confidence interval, 44.9%-71.4%), showing the primary endpoint was met (P < 0.0001). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in two patients (3.4%). Regarding the pharmacokinetics of palonosetron, neither the plasma concentration immediately after administration nor the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity differed significantly among the age groups. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the efficacy of palonosetron in pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and confirmed the appropriateness of the 20 µg/kg dose, regardless of age, considering the safety and pharmacokinetic profiles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: JapicCTI-163305, registered 6 June 2016.

Reduction in All-Cause Mortality with Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Rationale: The IMPACT (Informing the Pathway of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment) trial demonstrated a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (ACM) risk with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus UMEC/VI in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at risk of future exacerbations. Five hundred seventy-four patients were censored in the original analysis owing to incomplete vital status information.Objectives: Report ACM and impact of stepping down therapy, following collection of additional vital status data.Methods: Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg, FF/VI 100/25 µg, or UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg following a run-in on their COPD therapies. Time to ACM was prespecified. Additional vital status data collection and subsequent analyses were performed post hoc.Measurements and Main Results: We report vital status data for 99.6% of the intention-to-treat population (n = 10,355), documenting 98 (2.36%) deaths on FF/UMEC/VI, 109 (2.64%) on FF/VI, and 66 (3.19%) on UMEC/VI. For FF/UMEC/VI, the hazard ratio for death was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.99; P = 0.042) versus UMEC/VI and 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.16; P = 0.387) versus FF/VI. Independent adjudication confirmed lower rates of cardiovascular and respiratory death and death associated with the patient's COPD.Conclusions: In this secondary analysis of an efficacy outcome from the IMPACT trial, once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI triple therapy reduced the risk of ACM versus UMEC/VI in patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations.

Phase IIIb Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous NEPA for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) in Patients with Breast Cancer Receiving Initial and Repeat Cycles of Anthracycline and Cyclophosphamide (AC) Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: NEPA, a combination antiemetic of a neurokinin-1 (NK1 ) receptor antagonist (RA) (netupitant [oral]/fosnetupitant [intravenous; IV]) and 5-HT3 RA, palonosetron] offers 5-day CINV prevention with a single dose. Fosnetupitant solution contains no allergenic excipients, surfactant, emulsifier, or solubility enhancer. A phase III study of patients receiving cisplatin found no infusion-site or anaphylactic reactions related to IV NEPA. However, hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been reported with other IV NK1 RAs, particularly fosaprepitant in patients receiving anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)-based chemotherapy. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of IV NEPA in the AC setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase IIIb, multinational, randomized, double-blind study enrolled females with breast cancer naive to highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive a single 30-minute infusion of IV NEPA or single oral NEPA capsule on day 1 prior to AC, in repeated (up to 4) cycles. Oral dexamethasone was given to all patients on day 1 only. RESULTS: A total of 402 patients were included. The adverse event (AE) profiles were similar for IV and oral NEPA and consistent with those expected. Most AEs were mild or moderate with a similarly low incidence of treatment-related AEs in both groups. There were no treatment-related injection-site AEs and no reports of hypersensitivity or anaphylaxis. The efficacy of IV and oral NEPA were similar, with high complete response (no emesis/no rescue) rates observed in cycle 1 (overall [0-120 hours] 73.0% IV NEPA, 77.3% oral NEPA) and maintained over subsequent cycles. CONCLUSION: IV NEPA was highly effective and safe with no associated hypersensitivity and injection-site reactions in patients receiving AC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: As a combination of a neurokinin-1 (NK1 ) receptor antagonist (RA) and 5-HT3 RA, NEPA offers 5-day chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention with a single dose and an opportunity to improve adherence to antiemetic guidelines. In this randomized multinational phase IIIb study, intravenous (IV) NEPA (fosnetupitant/palonosetron) was safe and highly effective in patients receiving multiple cycles of anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)-based chemotherapy. Unlike other IV NK1 RAs, the IV NEPA combination solution does not require any surfactant, emulsifier, or solubility enhancer and contains no allergenic excipients. Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been reported with other IV NK1 RAs, most commonly with fosaprepitant in the AC setting. Importantly, there were no injection-site or hypersensitivity reactions associated with IV NEPA.