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 1/2018

01-01-2018 | Original Article

Efficacy of palonosetron to prevent delayed nausea and vomiting in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients undergoing repeated cycles of the CHOP regimen

Authors: Bungo Saito, Hidetoshi Nakashima, Maasa Abe, So Murai, Yuta Baba, Nana Arai, Yukiko Kawaguchi, Shun Fujiwara, Nobuyuki Kabasawa, Hiroyuki Tsukamoto, Yui Uto, Hirotsugu Ariizumi, Kouji Yanagisawa, Norimichi Hattori, Hiroshi Harada, Tsuyoshi Nakamaki

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Few studies have investigated the effect of palonosetron on delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in lymphoma patients receiving the CHOP regimen. We conducted a prospective clinical trial to assess the efficacy of palonosetron in patients receiving the CHOP regimen.

Methods

Complete control (CC: emesis-free and mild nausea) during delayed phase (24–120 h) was the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was complete response (CR: emesis-free) during acute (0–24 h), delayed, and overall phases (0–120 h), and CC during acute and overall phases. Palonosetron (0.75 mg) was administered before chemotherapy on day 1 of both the first and second CHOP cycles.

Results

The efficacy of palonosetron in preventing emesis was evaluated in 40 patients. Across two cycles, over 85% of patients achieved CR. As the primary endpoint, the proportion of patients achieving CC in the delayed phase increased from 70% (cycle 1) to 85% (cycle 2). CR rate in the delayed phase increased from 85% (cycle 1) to 95% (cycle 2).

Conclusion

These results suggest that the antiemetic effects during the delayed phase were inferior to those in the acute phase during the first cycle. However, even at the same dose of palonosetron, CR and CC rates increased in the second cycle.
Literature
1.
The Italian Group for Antiemetic (1995) Dexamethasone, granisetron, or both for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy of cancer. N Engl J Med 332:1–5CrossRef
2.
Geling O, Erchler HG (2005) Should 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists be administered beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy to prevent delayed emesis? Systematic re-evaluation of clinical evidence and drug cost implications. J Clin Oncol 20:1289–1294CrossRef
3.
Saito M, Aogi K, Sekine I, Yoshizawa H, Yanagita Y, Sakai H, Inoue K, Kitagawa C, Ogura T, Mitsuhashi S (2009) Palonosetron plus dexamethasone versus granisetron plus dexamethasone for prevention of nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy: double-dummy, randomized, comparative phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 10:115–124CrossRef
4.
Di Renzo N, Montanini A, Mannina SD, Dondi A, Muci S, Mancuso S, De Paolis MR, Plati C, Stelitano C, Patti C, Olivieri A, Liardo E, Buda G, Cantaffa R, Federico M (2011) Single-dose palonosetrone for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy containing steroids: results of phase II study from the Gruppo Italiano per lo studio dei Linfomi (GISL). Support Care Cancer 19:1505–1510CrossRef
5.
Choi BS, Borsaru GP, Ballinari G, Voisin D, Di Renzo N (2014) Multicenter phase IV study palonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphomas undergoing repeated cycles of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Leuk. Lymphoma 55:544–550CrossRef
6.
Miyata Y, Yakushijin K, Inui Y, Imamura Y, Goto H, Mizutani Y, Kurata K, Kakiuchi S, Sanada Y, Minami Y, Kawamoto S, Yamamoto K, Ito M, Tominaga R, Gomyo H, Mizuno I, Nomura T, Kitagawa K, Sugimoto T, Murayama T, Matsuoka H, Minami H (2016) A prospective study of the antiemetic effect of palonosetron in malignant lymphoma patients treated with the CHOP regimen. Int J Hematol 104:682–691CrossRef
7.
Rigacci L, Landi C, Garuso JP, Puccini B, Alterini R, Carrai V, Perrone T, Bosi A (2012) Single dose palonosetron and dexamethasone in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by high emetogenic ABVD regime in Hodgkin lymphoma patients. Leuk Res 36:182–185CrossRef
8.
Molassiotis A, Lee PH, Burke TA, Dicato M, Gascon P, Roila F, Aapro M (2016) Anticipatory nausea, risk factors, and its impact on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results from the Pan European Emesis Registry study. J Pain Symptom Manag 51:987–993CrossRef
9.
Eisenberg P, Figueroa-Vadillo J, Zamora R, Charu V, Hajdenberg J, Cartmell A, Macciocchi A, Grunberg S, 99–04 Palonosetron Study Group (2003) Improvement prevention of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with palonosetron, a pharmacologically novel 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. Cancer 98:2473–2482CrossRef
10.
Gralla R, Lichinitser M, Van der Vegt S, Sleeboom H, Mezger J, Peschel C, Tonini G, Labianca R, Macciocchi A, Aapro M (2003) Palonosetron improves prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: results of a double-blind randomized phase III trial comparing single dose of palonosetron with ondansetron. Ann Oncol 14:1570–1577CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Efficacy of palonosetron to prevent delayed nausea and vomiting in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients undergoing repeated cycles of the CHOP regimen
Authors
Bungo Saito
Hidetoshi Nakashima
Maasa Abe
So Murai
Yuta Baba
Nana Arai
Yukiko Kawaguchi
Shun Fujiwara
Nobuyuki Kabasawa
Hiroyuki Tsukamoto
Yui Uto
Hirotsugu Ariizumi
Kouji Yanagisawa
Norimichi Hattori
Hiroshi Harada
Tsuyoshi Nakamaki
Publication date
01-01-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3845-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Supportive Care in Cancer 1/2018 Go to the issue

Original Article

Expert agreed standards for the selection and development of cancer support group leaders: an online reactive Delphi study

Commentary

An optimal design for the study of palliative sedation—making somewhat better pictures

Original Article

Do carer’s levels of unmet needs change over time when caring for patients diagnosed with high-grade glioma and how are these needs correlated with distress?

Original Article

Perspectives of newly diagnosed advanced cancer patients receiving dignity therapy during cancer treatment

Original Article

Barriers and enablers to implementing scalp cooling in Australia: a qualitative study of health professionals’ attitudes to and experience with scalp cooling

Letter to the editor

Shared decision-making in palliative care: desires and facts
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