9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Phase II randomized, controlled trial of 1 day versus 3 days of dexamethasone combined with palonosetron and aprepitant to prevent nausea and vomiting in Japanese breast cancer patients receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Dexamethasone, plus a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and an NK-1 receptor antagonist are recommended for controlling the chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) of highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Several days of dexamethasone are effective for CINV; however, dexamethasone also has side effects. The purpose of this trial was to investigate whether the use of a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and an NK-1 receptor antagonist could allow a reduced dose of dexamethasone for breast cancer patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

          Methods

          Eighty breast cancer patients who received an anthracycline-cyclophosphamide combination regimen were enrolled. The patients were randomized to arm A (dexamethasone days 1–3) and arm B (dexamethasone day 1). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) (no emetic episodes and no rescue medication) during the overall phase (days 1–5). The secondary endpoints were the CR during the delayed phase (days 2–5), complete control (CC) (no emetic episodes, no rescue medication, and no more than mild nausea) during the overall phase, and the safety of this antiemetic therapy.

          Results

          There were no significant differences in the rates of CR and CC between arm A and B as follows: CR overall phase—arm A: 82.9 %, 90 % confidence interval [CI] 71.3–90.5 % vs arm B: 82.1 %, 90 % CI 70.0–90.0 %; p = 1.00; CR delayed phase—arm A: 87.8 %, 90 % CI 77.0–93.9 % vs arm B: 94.9 %, 90 % CI 85.6–98.3 %; p = 0.43; CC overall phase—arm A: 48.8 %, 90 % CI 36.4–61.3 % vs arm B: 61.5 %, 90 % CI 48.4–73.2 %; p = 0.27. There were very few adverse events and no severe adverse events associated with this antiemetic therapy.

          Conclusions

          The results suggest that the antiemetic effect provided by dexamethasone administered for 3 days can be obtained by dexamethasone administered for 1 day.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Frequency of hepatitis B virus reactivation in cancer patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy: a prospective study of 626 patients with identification of risk factors.

          Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a well-described complication in cancer patients who receive cytotoxic chemotherapy and may result in varying degrees of liver damage. As chemotherapy is used increasingly in cancer patients, HBV reactivation during cytotoxic treatment may become a more common problem. In lymphoma patients, the incidence of chronic HBV infection has been reported to be 26%, of whom 47% developed HBV reactivation during chemotherapy. However, corresponding data for patients with other malignancies undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy are not known. In this prospective study, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) was determined in 626 consecutive cancer patients who received cytotoxic chemotherapy over a 12-month period. Seventy-eight patients (12%) were found to be HBsAg positive. Thirty-four (44%) developed raised alanine transaminase during their course of chemotherapy. In these 34 patients, hepatitis was attributed to HBV reactivation in 15 patients (44%), chronic active HBV infection in 1 patient (3%), hepatitis C infection in 1 patient (3%), malignant hepatic infiltration in 2 patients (6%), and the use of hepatotoxic chemotherapeutic agents in 11 patients (32%). The causes of hepatitis were unknown in 4 patients (12%). HBV reactivation was more likely to develop in patients who were male, younger age, HBeAg seropositive, and those with lymphoma. Presence of malignant hepatic infiltration, baseline pre-treatment alanine transaminase, total bilirubin, and HBV DNA levels did not correlate with the development of HBV reactivation. Of the 15 patients who developed HBV reactivation, antiviral therapy with lamivudine was available and used in 9. There was no HBV-related mortality during chemotherapy. It is concluded that in patients with chronic HBV infection under chemotherapy, HBV reactivation occurs in nearly 20% of them and accounts for 44% of hepatitis cases. The risk factors identified include male sex, younger age, HBeAg seropositive, and the diagnosis of lymphoma. In HBV endemic areas, patients with risk factors for HBV reactivation should be identified prior to receiving cytotoxic treatment and monitored closely. The potential benefit of lamivudine requires further confirmation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy and tolerability of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

            This is the first study in which the NK(1)-receptor antagonist, aprepitant (APR), was evaluated for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Eligible breast cancer patients were naive to emetogenic chemotherapy and treated with cyclophosphamide +/- doxorubicin or epirubicin. Patients were randomly assigned to either an aprepitant regimen (day 1, APR 125 mg, ondansetron (OND) 8 mg, and dexamethasone 12 mg before chemotherapy and OND 8 mg 8 hours later; days 2 through 3, APR 80 qd) [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] or a control regimen (day 1, OND 8 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg before chemotherapy and OND 8 mg 8 hours later; days 2 through 3, OND 8 mg bid). Data on nausea, vomiting, and use of rescue medication were collected with a self-report diary. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients with complete response, defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue therapy, during 120 hours after initiation of chemotherapy in cycle 1. The secondary end point was the proportion of patients with an average item score higher than 6 of 7 on the Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaire. Of 866 patients randomized, 857 patients (99%) were assessable. Overall complete response was greater with the aprepitant regimen than with the control regimen (50.8% v 42.5%; P = .015). More patients in the aprepitant group reported minimal or no impact of CINV on daily life (63.5% v 55.6%; P = .019). Both treatments were generally well tolerated. The aprepitant regimen was more effective than the control regimen for prevention of CINV in patients receiving both an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Palonosetron plus dexamethasone versus granisetron plus dexamethasone for prevention of nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, comparative phase III trial.

              Palonosetron is a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT(3))-receptor antagonist that has shown better efficacy than ondansetron and dolasetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, and similar efficacy to ondansetron in preventing CINV in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. In this phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, stratified, parallel-group, active-comparator trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of palonosetron versus granisetron for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, both of which were administered with dexamethasone in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Between July 5, 2006, and May 31, 2007, 1143 patients with cancer who were receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (ie, cisplatin, or an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide combination [AC/EC]) were recruited from 75 institutions in Japan, and randomly assigned to either single-dose palonosetron (0.75 mg), or granisetron (40 microg/kg) 30 min before chemotherapy on day 1, both with dexamethasone (16 mg intravenously) on day 1 followed by additional doses (8 mg intravenously for patients receiving cisplatin or 4 mg orally for patients receiving AC/EC) on days 2 and 3. A non-deterministic minimisation method with a stochastic-biased coin was applied to the randomisation of patients. Covariates known to effect emetic risk, such as sex, age, and type of highly emetogenic chemotherapy, were used as stratification factors of minimisation to ensure balance between the treatment groups. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with a complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication) during the acute phase (0-24 h postchemotherapy; non-inferiority comparison with granisetron) and the proportion of patients with a complete response during the delayed phase (24-120 h postchemotherapy; superiority comparison with granisetron). The non-inferiority margin was predefined in the study protocol as a 10% difference between groups in the proportion of patients with complete response. The palonosetron dose of 0.75 mg was chosen on the basis of two dose-determining trials in Japanese patients. All patients who received study treatment and highly emetogenic chemotherapy were included in the efficacy analyses (modified intention to treat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00359567. 1114 patients were included in the efficacy analyses: 555 patients in the palonosetron group and 559 patients in the granisetron group. 418 of 555 patients (75.3%) in the palonosetron group had complete response during the acute phase compared with 410 of 559 patients (73.3%) in the granisetron group (mean difference 2.9% [95% CI -2.70 to 7.27]). During the delayed phase, 315 of 555 patients (56.8%) had complete response in the palonosetron group compared with 249 of 559 patients (44.5%) in the granisetron group (p<0.0001). The main treatment-related adverse events were constipation (97 of 557 patients [17.4%] in the palonosetron group vs 88 of 562 [15.7%] in the granisetron group) and raised concentrations of serum aminotransferases (aspartate aminotransferase: 24 of 557 [4.3%] vs 34 of 562 [6.0%]; alanine aminotransferase: 16 of 557 [2.9%] vs 33 of 562 [5.9%]); no grade 4 main treatment-related adverse events were reported. When administered with dexamethasone before highly emetogenic chemotherapy, palonosetron exerts efficacy against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting which is non-inferior to that of granisetron in the acute phase and better than that of granisetron in the delayed phase, with a comparable safety profile for the two treatments. Taiho Pharmaceutical (Tokyo, Japan).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +81-42-778-8111 , htanino@med.kitasato-u.ac.jp
                Journal
                Support Care Cancer
                Support Care Cancer
                Supportive Care in Cancer
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0941-4355
                1433-7339
                8 September 2015
                8 September 2015
                2016
                : 24
                : 1405-1411
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Surgery, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-ku, Sagamihara, 252-0374 Japan
                [ ]Department of Surgery, Yamato Municipal Hospital, Yamato, Japan
                Article
                2905
                10.1007/s00520-015-2905-4
                4729792
                26349772
                d7b49bfb-7b5f-4ec1-8dfa-e7ab3c1f43af
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 11 February 2015
                : 16 August 2015
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                breast cancer,palonosetron,aprepitant,dexamethasone,randomized controlled trial,highly emetogenic chemotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content281

                Cited by10

                Most referenced authors199