PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) palonosetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer who had incomplete control of CINV during their previous cycle of low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC). METHODS: Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed cancer, ≥18 years of age, with a Karnofsky Performance Scale score of ≥50% who had received LEC that induced vomiting and/or at least moderate nausea during their previous treatment cycle received palonosetron 0.25 mg IV 30 min before chemotherapy. Outcomes were recorded in patient diaries over 120 h and at an end-of-study visit on days 6, 7, or 8 after LEC administration. The primary efficacy variable was the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication at 0-24 h (acute post-chemotherapy phase), 24-120 h (delayed phase), and 0-120 h (overall). RESULTS: Complete responses among the intent-to-treat study population (n = 34) were recorded for 88.2 % of patients in the acute phase, 67.6% in the delayed phase, and 67.6% overall. No emetic episodes occurred in 91.2 and 79.4% of patients during the acute and delayed phases, respectively, and no nausea in 73.5 and 52.9%, respectively. Palonosetron was well tolerated; only two patients experienced treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among the patients with cancer who had a history of CINV with LEC, palonosetron was effective in preventing CINV in both the acute and delayed post-chemotherapy phases, and was well tolerated. Randomized comparative studies in larger populations of patients receiving LEC are needed to confirm these findings.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) palonosetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer who had incomplete control of CINV during their previous cycle of low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC). METHODS:Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed cancer, ≥18 years of age, with a Karnofsky Performance Scale score of ≥50% who had received LEC that induced vomiting and/or at least moderate nausea during their previous treatment cycle received palonosetron 0.25 mg IV 30 min before chemotherapy. Outcomes were recorded in patient diaries over 120 h and at an end-of-study visit on days 6, 7, or 8 after LEC administration. The primary efficacy variable was the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication at 0-24 h (acute post-chemotherapy phase), 24-120 h (delayed phase), and 0-120 h (overall). RESULTS: Complete responses among the intent-to-treat study population (n = 34) were recorded for 88.2 % of patients in the acute phase, 67.6% in the delayed phase, and 67.6% overall. No emetic episodes occurred in 91.2 and 79.4% of patients during the acute and delayed phases, respectively, and no nausea in 73.5 and 52.9%, respectively. Palonosetron was well tolerated; only two patients experienced treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among the patients with cancer who had a history of CINV with LEC, palonosetron was effective in preventing CINV in both the acute and delayed post-chemotherapy phases, and was well tolerated. Randomized comparative studies in larger populations of patients receiving LEC are needed to confirm these findings.
Authors: Steven M Grunberg; David Warr; Richard J Gralla; Bernardo L Rapoport; Paul J Hesketh; Karin Jordan; Birgitte T Espersen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2010-10-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Maurizio Tonato; Rebecca A Clark-Snow; David Osoba; Albano Del Favero; Enzo Ballatori; Sussanne Borjeson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2004-11-18 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: G R Morrow; J A Roscoe; J T Hickok; R M Stern; H I Pierce; D B King; T K Banerjee; P Weiden Journal: Oncology (Williston Park) Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 2.990
Authors: M S Aapro; S M Grunberg; G M Manikhas; G Olivares; T Suarez; S A Tjulandin; L F Bertoli; F Yunus; B Morrica; F Lordick; A Macciocchi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2006-06-09 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: R Gralla; M Lichinitser; S Van Der Vegt; H Sleeboom; J Mezger; C Peschel; G Tonini; R Labianca; A Macciocchi; M Aapro Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Steven M Grunberg; Robert R Deuson; Panagiotis Mavros; Olga Geling; Mogens Hansen; Giorgio Cruciani; Bruno Daniele; Gerard De Pouvourville; Edward B Rubenstein; Gedske Daugaard Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Peter Eisenberg; Jazmin Figueroa-Vadillo; Rosalio Zamora; Veena Charu; Julio Hajdenberg; Alan Cartmell; Alberto Macciocchi; Steven Grunberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ian Olver; Christina H Ruhlmann; Franziska Jahn; Lee Schwartzberg; Bernardo Rapoport; Cynthia N Rittenberg; Rebecca Clark-Snow Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Michelle Zhou; Marko Popovic; Mark Pasetka; Natalie Pulenzas; Soha Ahrari; Edward Chow; Carlo DeAngelis Journal: Ther Clin Risk Manag Date: 2015-05-05 Impact factor: 2.423