Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 6/2017

01-06-2017 | Original Article

Effectiveness of antiemetic triplet therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone for gynecologic cancer patients receiving carboplatin and paclitaxel: a prospective single-arm study

Authors: Fuminori Ito, Naoto Furukawa

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 6/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

There is no positive evidence for the efficacy of antiemetic triplet therapy with aprepitant (APR), palonosetron (PALO), and dexamethasone (DEX) for moderate emetogenic chemotherapy, especially for gynecologic malignancies. Thus, the present study evaluated the efficacy of this triplet therapy in patients receiving carboplatin and paclitaxel (CP) for gynecologic malignancy.

Methods

Seventy patients with gynecologic cancer receiving CP were enrolled into a prospective single-arm study with APR (125 mg on day 1, 80 mg on days 2–3), PALO (0.75 mg), and DEX (20 mg) before initiating chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was delayed complete response (CR) rate, i.e., no vomiting and no rescue, at 24–120 h after chemotherapy administration.

Results

Seventy patients were enrolled. The delayed CR rate was 97.1% (68/70). No serious adverse events were observed. Younger patient age (≤50 years) tended to be associated with a poor delayed CR rate.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated a notable efficacy of antiemetic triplet therapy with APR, PALO, and DEX in female patients receiving CP. Further evaluation with a larger phase III trial is warranted.
Literature
1.
Hesketh PJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al (2016) Antiemetics: American Society of Clinical Oncology focused guideline update. J Clin Oncol 34(4):381–386CrossRefPubMed
2.
Tamura K, Aiba K, Saeki T et al (2015) Testing the effectiveness of antiemetic guidelines: results of a prospective registry by the CINV Study Group of Japan. Int J Clin Oncol 20(5):855–865CrossRefPubMed
3.
Furukawa N, Kanayama S, Tanase Y, Ito F (2015) Palonosetron in combination with 1-day versus 3-day dexamethasone to prevent nausea and vomiting in patients receiving paclitaxel and carboplatin. Support Care Cancer 23(11):3317–3322CrossRefPubMed
4.
Warr DG, Street JC, Carides AD (2011) Evaluation of risk factors predictive of nausea and vomiting with current standard-of-care antiemetic treatment: analysis of phase 3 trial of aprepitant in patients receiving adriamycin-cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy. Support Care Cancer 19(6):807–813CrossRefPubMed
5.
Sekine I, Segawa Y, Kubota K et al (2016) Risk factors of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: index for personalized antiemetic prophylaxis. Cancer Sci 104(6):711–717CrossRef
6.
7.
8.
Komatsu Y, Okita K, Yuki S et al (2015) Open-label, randomized, comparative, phase III study on effects of reducing steroid use in combination with palonosetron. Cancer Sci 106(7):891–895CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Nishimura J, Satoh T, Fukunaga M, Multi-center Clinical Study Group of Osaka, Colorectal Cancer Treatment Group (MCSGO) et al (2015) Combination antiemetic therapy with aprepitant/fosaprepitant in patients with colorectal cancer receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (SENRI trial): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Eur J Cancer 51(10):1274–1282CrossRefPubMed
10.
Yahata H, Kobayashi H, Sonoda K et al (2016) Efficacy of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimen: a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study in patients with gynecologic cancer receiving paclitaxel and carboplatin. Int J Clin Oncol 21(3):491–497CrossRefPubMed
11.
Tanioka M, Kitao A, Matsumoto K et al (2013) A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of aprepitant in nondrinking women younger than 70 years receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 109(4):859–865CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Suzuki K, Yamanaka T, Hashimoto H, Shimada Y, Arata K, Matsui R et al (2016) Randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of palonosetron versus granisetron in the triplet regimen for preventing after highly emetogenic chemotherapy: TRIPLE study. Ann Oncol 27(8):1601–1606CrossRefPubMed
13.
Aapro MS, Grunberg SM, Manikhas GM et al (2006) A phase III, double-blind, randomized trial of palonosetron compared with ondansetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 17(9):1441–1449CrossRefPubMed
14.
Schwartzberg LS, Barbour SY, Morrow GR et al (2014) Pooled analysis of phase III clinical studies of palonosetron versus ondansetron, dolasetron, and granisetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Support Care Cancer 22:469–477CrossRefPubMed
15.
Humphreys S, Pellissier J, Jones A (2013) Cost-effectiveness of an aprepitant regimen for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer in the UK. Cancer Manag Res 5:215–224CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Takemoto H, Nishimura J, Komori T et al (2016) Combination antiemetic therapy with aprepitant/fosaprepitant in patients with colorectal cancer receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the SENRI trial: analysis of risk factors for vomiting and nausea. Int J Clin Oncol. doi:10.​1007/​s10147-016-1022-9
Metadata
Title
Effectiveness of antiemetic triplet therapy with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone for gynecologic cancer patients receiving carboplatin and paclitaxel: a prospective single-arm study
Authors
Fuminori Ito
Naoto Furukawa
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 6/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3607-x

Other articles of this Issue 6/2017

Supportive Care in Cancer 6/2017 Go to the issue

Original Article

Urine drug screen findings among ambulatory oncology patients in a supportive care clinic

Original Article

Association between bone scan index and activities of daily living in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Original Article

Nothing left to chance? The impact of locus of control on physical and mental quality of life in terminal cancer patients

Review Article

A systematic review of methodologies, endpoints, and outcome measures in randomized trials of radiation therapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Original Article

Treatment of pancreatic insufficiency using pancreatic extract in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a pilot study (PICNIC)

Original Article

Over- and under-prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia relative to evidence-based guidelines is associated with differences in outcomes: findings from the MONITOR-GCSF study
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
Image Credits