Difference in the emetic control among highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: Implementation for appropriate use of aprepitant

Aoki,Shinya; Iihara,Hirotoshi; Nishigaki,Minako; Imanishi,Yoshinori; Yamauchi,Keita; Ishihara,Masashi; Kitaichi,Kiyoyuki; Itoh,Yoshinori

doi:10.3892/mco.2012.15

Difference in the emetic control among highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: Implementation for appropriate use of aprepitant

Authors:
- Shinya Aoki
- Hirotoshi Iihara
- Minako Nishigaki
- Yoshinori Imanishi
- Keita Yamauchi
- Masashi Ishihara
- Kiyoyuki Kitaichi
- Yoshinori Itoh
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacy, Gifu Pharmaceutical University, Gifu 501-1196, Japan, Department of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, Gifu 501-1194, Japan
Published online on: August 27, 2012 https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2012.15
Pages: 41-46

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Although antiemetic medication based on the emetogenicity of the cancer chemotherapy regimen is recommended, emetic control varies even among highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In the present study, we retrospectively investigated the rates of emetic control by a combination of granisetron, 5-HT3 antagonist and dexamethasone in various HEC regimens, including 5 single-day chemotherapy regimens such as gemcitabine/cisplatin (GEM/CDDP), epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (EPI/CPA), pemetrexed or vinorelbine/cisplatin (PEM or VNR/CDDP), doxorubicin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine (ABVd) and rituximab/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prendisolone (R-CHOP21), and 2 multiple-day chemotherapy regimens such as 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin (5-FU/CDDP) and bleomycin/etoposide/cisplatin (BEP). Complete response (no emesis, no rescue treatment) during the overall period (days 1-5) was assessed as the primary endpoint. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting was well-controlled (complete response >70%) in GEM/CDDP and R-CHOP21, but not in other regimens. The effect of a triple antiemetic medication including aprepitant (APR) was subsequently examined in patients receiving EPI/CPA and 5-FU/CDDP. Complete response was significantly improved in patients receiving 5-FU/CDDP but not in those receiving EPI/CPA, although the complete protection from vomiting significantly increased in both cases. Of note, the administration of APR for 5 days, but not for 3 days, was required to completely block the incidence of vomiting during the 7 days of the observation period in patients receiving 5-FU/CDDP. These findings suggest that APR should be used appropriately based on the emetogenicity of HEC regimens.

View Figures

View References

1.	Bloechl-Daum B, Deuson RR, Mavros P, Hansen M and Herrstedt J: Delayed nausea and vomiting continue to reduce patients’ quality of life after highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy despite antiemetic treatment. J Clin Oncol. 24:4472–4478. 2006.
2.	Lachaine J, Yelle L, Kaizer L, Dufour A, Hopkins S and Deuson R: Chemotherapy-induced emesis: quality of life and economic impact in the context of current practice in Canada. Support Cancer Ther. 2:181–187. 2005.
3.	Sun CC, Bodurka DC, Weaver CB, et al: Rankings and symptom assessments of side effects from chemotherapy: insights from experienced patients with ovarian cancer. Support Care Cancer. 13:219–227. 2005.
4.	Roscoe JA, Morrow GR, Aapro MS, Molassiotis A and Olver I: Anticipatory nausea and vomiting. Support Care Cancer. 19:1533–1538. 2011.
5.	Roila F, Herrstedt J, Aapro M, et al: 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–S243. 2010.
6.	Basch E, Prestrud AA, Hesketh PJ, et al: Antiemetics: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 29:4189–4198. 2011.
7.	National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN): Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Antiemesis. Version I, 2011. (Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/antiemesis.pdf). Accessed April 12, 2012.
8.	de Wit R, Herrstedt J, Rapoport B, et al: Addition of the oral NK₁ antagonist aprepitant to standard antiemetics provides protection against nausea and vomiting during multiple cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 21:4105–4111. 2003.
9.	Grunberg S, Chua D, Maru A, et al: 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. 29:1495–1501. 2011.
10.	Hesketh PJ, Grunberg SM, Gralla RJ, et al: 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. 21:4112–4119. 2003.
11.	Rapoport BL, Jordan K, Boice JA, et al: Aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with a broad range of moderately emetogenic chemotherapies and tumor types: a randomized, double-blind study. Support Care Cancer. 18:423–431. 2010.
12.	Hesketh PJ, Grunberg SM, Herrstedt J, et al: Combined data from two phase III trials of the NK₁ antagonist aprepitant plus a 5HT₃ antagonist and a corticosteroid for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: effect of gender on treatment response. Support Care Cancer. 14:354–360. 2006.
13.	von der Maase H, Hansen SW, Roberts JT, et al: Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 18:3068–3077. 2000.
14.	Tobinai K, Ogura M, Itoh K, et al: Randomized phase II study of concurrent and sequential combinations of rituximab plus CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone) chemotherapy in untreated indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: 7-year follow-up results. Cancer Sci. 101:2579–2585. 2010.
15.	Piccart MJ, Di Leo A, Beauduin M, et al: Phase III trial comparing two dose levels of epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 19:3103–3110. 2001.
16.	Scagliotti GV, Parikh P, von Pawel J, et al: Phase III study comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 26:3543–3551. 2008.
17.	Ohe Y, Ohashi Y, Kubota K, et al: Randomized phase III study of cisplatin plus irinotecan versus carboplatin plus paclitaxel, cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and cisplatin plus vinorelbine for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Four-Arm Cooperative Study in Japan. Ann Oncol. 18:317–323. 2007.
18.	Ogura M, Itoh K, Kinoshita T, et al: Phase II study of ABVd therapy for newly diagnosed clinical stage II–IV Hodgkin lymphoma: Japan Clinical Oncology Group study (JCOG 9305). Int J Hematol. 92:713–724. 2010.
19.	Lefebvre JL, Chevalier D, Luboinski B, Kirkpatrick A, Collette L and Sahmoud T: Larynx preservation in pyriform sinus cancer: preliminary results of a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trial. EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 88:890–899. 1996.
20.	de Wit R, Roberts JT, Wilkinson PM, et al: Equivalence of three or four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin chemotherapy and of a 3- or 5-day schedule in good-prognosis germ cell cancer: a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genitourinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group and the Medical Research Council. J Clin Oncol. 19:1629–1640. 2001.
21.	Vitolo U, Chiappella A, Ferreri AJ, et al: First-line treatment for primary testicular diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with rituximab-CHOP, CNS prophylaxis, and contralateral testis irradiation: final results of an international phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 29:2766–2772. 2011.
22.	Dogliotti L, Carteni G, Siena S, et al: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: results of a randomized phase 2 trial. Eur Urol. 52:134–141. 2007.
23.	Warr DG, Hesketh PJ, Gralla RJ, et al: 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. 23:2822–2830. 2005.
24.	Poli-Bigelli S, Rodrigues-Pereira J, Carides AD, et al: Addition of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist aprepitant to standard antiemetic therapy improves control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Latin America. Cancer. 97:3090–3098. 2003.
25.	Chawla SP, Grunberg SM, Gralla RJ, et al: Establishing the dose of the oral NK₁ antagonist aprepitant for the prevention of chemo-therapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Cancer. 97:2290–2300. 2003.
26.	Jordan K, Kinitz I, Voigt W, Behlendorf T, Wolf HH and Schmoll HJ: Safety and efficacy of a triple antiemetic combination with the NK-1 antagonist aprepitant in highly and moderately emetogenic multiple-day chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 45:1184–1187. 2009.