Chiao-En Wu1, Chuang-Chi Liaw. 1. Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County, Taiwan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced emesis remains a problem despite prophylaxis with 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) antagonists and dexamethasone. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding aprepitant, a neurokinin-1(NK-1) receptor antagonist, as a secondary antiemetic prophylaxis in cases failing to achieve full protection against emesis during the first cycle of a cisplatin-based regimen. METHODS: Patients receiving chemotherapy with a dose of at least 50 mg/m(2) of cisplatin-based regimens were eligible. If patients failed to achieve complete protection against vomiting when antiemetics (5-HT3 antagonists and dexamethasone) were given in cycle 1, aprepitant was added in subsequent cycles. The primary endpoint was complete response (no emetic episodes and no rescue antiemetics) during days 1-6. RESULTS: We analyzed 257 patients consecutively. Forty-nine patients (19%) had acute and/or delayed emesis during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Forty of 49 patients received aprepitant for secondary prophylaxis of emesis in the second cycle. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea was achieved in 63% and 55% of patients, respectively. Thirty-five patients received aprepitant for the third cycle. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea was achieved in 77% and 71% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Primary antiemetic prophylaxis with 5-HT3 antagonists plus dexamethasone provided more than 80% complete protection against cisplatin-induced emesis. Addition of aprepitant as secondary antiemetic prophylaxis in subsequent cycles provided adequate emesis protection in patients who failed primary prophylaxis. Using aprepitant as secondary antiemetic prophylaxis for cancer patients with cisplatin-induced emesis is feasible and cost-effective.
PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced emesis remains a problem despite prophylaxis with 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) antagonists and dexamethasone. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding aprepitant, a neurokinin-1(NK-1) receptor antagonist, as a secondary antiemetic prophylaxis in cases failing to achieve full protection against emesis during the first cycle of a cisplatin-based regimen. METHODS:Patients receiving chemotherapy with a dose of at least 50 mg/m(2) of cisplatin-based regimens were eligible. If patients failed to achieve complete protection against vomiting when antiemetics (5-HT3 antagonists and dexamethasone) were given in cycle 1, aprepitant was added in subsequent cycles. The primary endpoint was complete response (no emetic episodes and no rescue antiemetics) during days 1-6. RESULTS: We analyzed 257 patients consecutively. Forty-nine patients (19%) had acute and/or delayed emesis during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Forty of 49 patients received aprepitant for secondary prophylaxis of emesis in the second cycle. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea was achieved in 63% and 55% of patients, respectively. Thirty-five patients received aprepitant for the third cycle. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea was achieved in 77% and 71% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Primary antiemetic prophylaxis with 5-HT3 antagonists plus dexamethasone provided more than 80% complete protection against cisplatin-induced emesis. Addition of aprepitant as secondary antiemetic prophylaxis in subsequent cycles provided adequate emesis protection in patients who failed primary prophylaxis. Using aprepitant as secondary antiemetic prophylaxis for cancerpatients with cisplatin-induced emesis is feasible and cost-effective.
Authors: R J Gralla; D Osoba; M G Kris; P Kirkbride; P J Hesketh; L W Chinnery; R Clark-Snow; D P Gill; S Groshen; S Grunberg; J M Koeller; G R Morrow; E A Perez; J H Silber; D G Pfister Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Roila; J Herrstedt; M Aapro; R J Gralla; L H Einhorn; E Ballatori; E Bria; R A Clark-Snow; B T Espersen; P Feyer; S M Grunberg; P J Hesketh; K Jordan; M G Kris; E Maranzano; A Molassiotis; G Morrow; I Olver; B L Rapoport; C Rittenberg; M Saito; M Tonato; D Warr Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Mark G Kris; Paul J Hesketh; Mark R Somerfield; Petra Feyer; Rebecca Clark-Snow; James M Koeller; Gary R Morrow; Lawrence W Chinnery; Maurice J Chesney; Richard J Gralla; Steven M Grunberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joseph A Roscoe; Gary R Morrow; Matti S Aapro; Alexander Molassiotis; Ian Olver Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2010-08-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Paul J Hesketh; Steven M Grunberg; Richard J Gralla; David G Warr; Fausto Roila; Ronald de Wit; Sant P Chawla; Alexandra D Carides; Juliana Ianus; Mary E Elmer; Judith K Evans; Klaus Beck; Scott Reines; Kevin J Horgan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-10-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Roila; M Tonato; F Cognetti; E Cortesi; G Favalli; M Marangolo; D Amadori; M A Bella; V Gramazio; D Donati Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1991-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul J Hesketh; Jerry Younger; Pedro Sanz-Altamira; Melissa Hayden; Julie Bushey; Brian Trainor; Michael Krentzin; Peter Nowd; Konstantinos Arnaoutakis; Ann M Hesketh Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2008-12-06 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Joseph S Bubalo; Jon D Herrington; Marc Takemoto; Patricia Willman; Michael S Edwards; Casey Williams; Alan Fisher; Alison Palumbo; Eric Chen; Charles Blanke; Charles D Lopez Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 3.603