Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-02-2016 | Original Article

Comparison between 5-day aprepitant and single-dose fosaprepitant meglumine for preventing nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin-based chemotherapy

Authors: Yosuke Ando, Takahiro Hayashi, Kaori Ito, Eri Suzuki, Naoyuki Mine, Ayumi Miyamoto, Miyuki Oya, Hidezo Matsuda, Ami Isaji, Toru Nakanishi, Kazuyoshi Imaizumi, Tomoyuki Shibata, Tatsuyoshi Okada, Kazuo Sakurai, Kensei Naito, Ichiro Uyama, Kenji Kawada, Hiroshi Takahashi, Shigeki Yamada

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 2/2016

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to compare the preventive effect of 5-day administration of aprepitant with single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine against nausea and vomiting symptoms due to highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens comprising cisplatin (CDDP).

Methods

Subjects were inpatients who underwent chemotherapy for gastric cancer, esophageal cancer, lung cancer, or head and neck cancer with a regimen comprising 60 mg/m² or higher dose of CDDP. In this randomised, open-label, controlled study, the subjects were assigned to a group given aprepitant for 5 days or a group given a single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine. The nausea and vomiting symptoms that emerged within 7 days after the first CDDP administration were investigated with a questionnaire form; the results were compared between the two groups. Risk factors affecting nausea and vomiting symptoms were also investigated.

Results

Of the 101 patients enrolled, 93 patients were included (48 in the 5-day aprepitant group and 45 in the single fosaprepitant meglumine group). No significant intergroup differences in the complete response rate or the complete control rate were found over the entire period. The nausea score tended to increase from day 3 in both groups, but no significant intergroup difference was observed. Furthermore, the investigation of risk factors affecting moderate or severe nausea symptoms indicated that the fosaprepitant meglumine administration was not a risk factor.

Conclusions

Single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine was not inferior to 5-day administration of aprepitant for preventing acute and delayed nausea and vomiting symptoms occurring after administration of CDDP (60 mg/m² or higher).

Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Moliterni A et al (1995) Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 332:901–906PubMedCrossRef

Epelbaum R, Faraggi D, Ben-Arie Y et al (1990) Survival of diffuse large cell lymphoma. A multivariate analysis including dose intensity variables. Cancer 66:1124–1129PubMedCrossRef

Dewys WD, Begg C, Lavin PT et al (1980) Prognostic effect of weight loss prior to chemotherapy in cancer patients. Am J Med 69:491–497PubMedCrossRef

Alexandre J, Gross-Goupil M, Falissard B et al (2003) Evaluation of the nutritional and inflammatory status in cancer patients for the risk assessment of severe haematological toxicity following chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 14:36–41PubMedCrossRef

Roila F, Herrstedt J, Aapro M et al (2010) Guideline update for MASCC and ESMO in the prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results of the Perugia consensus conference. Ann Oncol 21:S232–S243CrossRef

Basch E, Prestrud AA, Hesketh PJ et al (2011) Antiemetics: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 29:4189–4198PubMedCrossRef

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) (2011) Clinical practice guidelines in oncology-antiemesis-versioni. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/antiemesis.pdf (Accessed April 12,2012)

Roila F, Hesketh PJ, Herrstedt J et al (2006) Prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced emesis: results of the 2004 Perugia International Antiemetic Consensus Conference. Ann Oncol 17:20–28PubMedCrossRef

Herrstedt J, Roila F, ESMO Guidelines Working Group (2008) Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: ESMO clinical recommendations for prophylaxis. Ann Oncol 19:110–112CrossRef

10.

Wilder-Smith OH, Borgeat A, Chappuis P et al (1993) Urinary serotonin metabolite excretion during cisplatin chemotherapy. Cancer 72:2239–2241PubMedCrossRef

11.

Ohmatsu H, Eguchi K, Shinkai T et al (1994) A randomized cross-over study of high-dose metoclopramide plus dexamethasone versus granisetron plus dexamethasone in patients receiving chemotherapy with high-dose cisplatin. Jpn J Cancer Res 85:1151–1158PubMedCrossRef

12.

Tattersall FD, Rycroft W, Francis B et al (1996) Tachykinin NK1 receptor antagonists act centrally to inhibit emesis induced by the chemotherapeutic agent cisplatin in ferrets. Neuropharmacology 35:1121–1129PubMedCrossRef

13.

Huskey SE, Dean BJ, Bakhtiar R et al (2003) Brain penetration of aprepitant, a substance P receptor antagonist, in ferrets. Drug Metab Dispos 31:785–791PubMedCrossRef

14.

Hesketh PJ, Van Belle S, Aapro M et al (2003) Differential involvement of neurotransmitters through the time course of cisplatin-induced emesis as revealed by therapy with specific receptor antagonists. Eur J Cancer 39:1074–1080PubMedCrossRef

15.

Watson JW, Gonsalves SF, Fossa AA et al (1995) The anti-emetic effects of CP-99,994 in the ferret and the dog: role of the NK1 receptor. Br J Pharmacol 115:84–94PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Andrews PL, Bhandari P (1993) Resinferatoxin, an ultrapotent capsaicin analogue, has anti-emetic properties in the ferret. Neuropharmacology 32:799–806PubMedCrossRef

17.

Ballard TM, Sänger S, Higgins GA et al (2001) Inhibition of shock-induced foot tapping behaviour in the gerbil by a tachykinin NK₁ receptor antagonist. Eur J Pharmacol 412:255–264PubMedCrossRef

18.

Rupniak NM (2002) Elucidating the antidepressant actions of substance P (NK₁ receptor) antagonists. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 3:257–261PubMed

19.

Hesketh PJ, Grunberg SM, Gralla RJ et al (2003) The oral neurokinin-1 antagonist aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin –the aprepitant protocol 052 study group. J Clin Oncol 21:4112–4119PubMedCrossRef

20.

Grunberg S, Chua D, Maru A et al (2011) Single-dose fosaprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with cisplatin therapy: randomized, double-blind study protocol-EASE. J Clin Oncol 29:1495–1501PubMedCrossRef

21.

Saito H, Yoshizawa H, Yoshimori K et al (2013) Efficacy and safety of single-dose fosaprepitant in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Ann Oncol 24:1067–1073PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

22.

Takahashi T, Hoshi E, Takagi M et al (2010) Multicenter, phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study of aprepitant in Japanese patients receiving high-dose cisplatin. Cancer Sci 101:2455–2461PubMedCrossRef

23.

Poli-Bigelli S, Rodrigues-Pereira J, Carides AD et al (2003) Addition of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist aprepitant to standard antiemetic therapy improves control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting –results from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Latin America. Cancer 97:3090–3098PubMedCrossRef

24.

Warr DG, Hesketh PJ, Gralla RJ et al (2005) Efficacy and tolerability of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 23:2822–2830PubMedCrossRef

25.

Longo F, Mansueto G, Lapadula V et al (2012) Combination of aprepitant, palonosetron and dexamethasone as antiemetic prophylaxis in lung cancer patients receiving multiple cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Int J Clin Pract 66:753–757PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

26.

Koeller JM, Aapro MS, Gralla RJ et al (2002) Antiemetic guidelines: creating a more practical treatment approach. Support Care Cancer 10:519–522PubMedCrossRef

27.

Koizumi W, Narahara H, Hara T et al (2008) S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 9:215–221PubMedCrossRef

28.

Sekine I, Segawa Y, Kubota K et al (2013) Risk factors of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: index for personalized antiemetic prophylaxis. Cancer Sci 104:711–717PubMedCrossRef

29.

Barrajon E, de las Peñas R (2000) Randomized double blind crossover study comparing ondansetron, granisetron and tropisetron. A cost-benefit analysis. Support Care Cancer 8:323–333PubMedCrossRef

30.

del Giglio A, Soares HP, Caparroz C et al (2000) Granisetron is equivalent to ondansetron for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cancer 89:2301–2308PubMedCrossRef

31.

Tsukuda M, Mochimatsu I, Furukawa M et al (1995) A randomized crossover comparison of azasetron and granisetron in the prophylaxis of emesis induced by chemotherapy including cisplatin. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 22:1959–1967PubMed

32.

Hashimoto H, Yamanaka T, Shimada Y et al. (2013) Palonosetron (PALO) versus granisetron (GRA) in the triplet regimen with dexamethasone (DEX) and aprepitant (APR) for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients (pts) receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) with cisplatin (CDDP): a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 31 (supple; abstr 9621)

33.

Aoki S, Iihara H, Nishigaki M et al (2013) Difference in the emetic control among highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: implementation for appropriate use of aprepitant. Mol Clin Oncol 1:41–46PubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Comparison between 5-day aprepitant and single-dose fosaprepitant meglumine for preventing nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin-based chemotherapy
Authors: Yosuke Ando
Takahiro Hayashi
Kaori Ito
Eri Suzuki
Naoyuki Mine
Ayumi Miyamoto
Miyuki Oya
Hidezo Matsuda
Ami Isaji
Toru Nakanishi
Kazuyoshi Imaizumi
Tomoyuki Shibata
Tatsuyoshi Okada
Kazuo Sakurai
Kensei Naito
Ichiro Uyama
Kenji Kawada
Hiroshi Takahashi
Shigeki Yamada
Publication date: 01-02-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2856-9

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

Relationship between sleep problems and psychological outcomes in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors and controls

Constipation in specialized palliative care: factors related to constipation when applying different definitions

Addressing the psychosocial wellbeing of teenage children of cancer patients and survivors

Pre-diagnosis employment status and financial circumstances predict cancer-related financial stress and strain among breast and prostate cancer survivors

Comparing the costs of three prostate cancer follow-up strategies: a cost minimisation analysis

CD34+ selection and the severity of oropharyngeal mucositis in total body irradiation-based allogeneic stem cell transplantation

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer