Rudolph M Navari1, Cindy K Nagy, Sarah E Gray. 1. Indiana University School of Medicine South Bend, 1234 Notre Dame Avenue, South Bend, IN 46617, USA. navari.1@nd.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE:Olanzapine has been shown to be a safe and effective agent for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Olanzapine may also be an effective rescue medication for patients who develop breakthrough CINV despite having received guideline-directed CINV prophylaxis. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized phase III trial was performed for the treatment of breakthrough CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving highlyemetogenic chemotherapy (cisplatin, ≥ 70 mg/m2 or doxorubicin, ≥ 50 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide, ≥ 600 mg/m2), comparing olanzapine to metoclopramide. Patients who developed breakthrough emesis or nausea despiteprophylactic dexamethasone (12 mg IV), palonosetron (0.25 mg IV), and fosaprepitant (150 mg IV) pre-chemotherapy and dexamethasone (8 mg p.o. daily, days 2-4) post-chemotherapy were randomized to receive olanzapine, 10 mg orally daily for 3 days or metoclopramide, 10 mg orally TID for 3 days. Patients were monitored for emesis and nausea for 72 h after taking olanzapine or metoclopramide. Two hundred seventy-six patients (median age 62 years, range 38-79; 43% women; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS 0,1) consented to the protocol. One hundred twelve patients developed breakthrough CINV and 108 were evaluable. RESULTS: During the 72-h observation period, 39 out of 56 (70%) patients receiving olanzapine had no emesis compared to 16 out of 52 (31%) patients with no emesis for patients receiving metoclopramide (p < 0.01). Patients without nausea (0, scale 0-10, M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory) during the 72-h observation period were those who took olanzapine, 68% (38 of 56), and metoclopramide, 23% (12 of 52) (p < 0.01). There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS:Olanzapine was significantly better than metoclopramide in the control of breakthrough emesis and nausea in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Olanzapine has been shown to be a safe and effective agent for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Olanzapine may also be an effective rescue medication for patients who develop breakthrough CINV despite having received guideline-directed CINV prophylaxis. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized phase III trial was performed for the treatment of breakthrough CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (cisplatin, ≥ 70 mg/m2 or doxorubicin, ≥ 50 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide, ≥ 600 mg/m2), comparing olanzapine to metoclopramide. Patients who developed breakthrough emesis or nausea despite prophylactic dexamethasone (12 mg IV), palonosetron (0.25 mg IV), and fosaprepitant (150 mg IV) pre-chemotherapy and dexamethasone (8 mg p.o. daily, days 2-4) post-chemotherapy were randomized to receive olanzapine, 10 mg orally daily for 3 days or metoclopramide, 10 mg orally TID for 3 days. Patients were monitored for emesis and nausea for 72 h after taking olanzapine or metoclopramide. Two hundred seventy-six patients (median age 62 years, range 38-79; 43% women; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS 0,1) consented to the protocol. One hundred twelve patients developed breakthrough CINV and 108 were evaluable. RESULTS: During the 72-h observation period, 39 out of 56 (70%) patients receiving olanzapine had no emesis compared to 16 out of 52 (31%) patients with no emesis for patients receiving metoclopramide (p < 0.01). Patients without nausea (0, scale 0-10, M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory) during the 72-h observation period were those who took olanzapine, 68% (38 of 56), and metoclopramide, 23% (12 of 52) (p < 0.01). There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS:Olanzapine was significantly better than metoclopramide in the control of breakthrough emesis and nausea in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.
Authors: F P Bymaster; J F Falcone; D Bauzon; J S Kennedy; K Schenck; N W DeLapp; M L Cohen Journal: Eur J Pharmacol Date: 2001-11-02 Impact factor: 4.432
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: Jacob Bleicher; Achala Bhaskara; Tim Huyck; Susan Constantino; Aditya Bardia; Charles L Loprinzi; Peter T Silberstein Journal: J Support Oncol Date: 2008-01
Authors: Yasmeen Razvi; Stephanie Chan; Thomas McFarlane; Erin McKenzie; Pearl Zaki; Carlo DeAngelis; William Pidduck; Ahmad Bushehri; Edward Chow; Katarzyna Joanna Jerzak Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Midori Nakagaki; Michael Barras; Cameron Curley; Jason P Butler; Glen A Kennedy Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: George Dranitsaris; Sasha Mazzarello; Stephanie Smith; Lisa Vandermeer; Nathaniel Bouganim; Mark Clemons Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 3.603