Antiemetic Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Antiemetics for adults for prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

About 70% to 80% of adults with cancer experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). CINV remains one of the most distressing symptoms associated with cancer therapy and is associated with decreased adherence to chemotherapy. Combining 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists with corticosteroids or additionally with neurokinin-1 (NK₁) receptor antagonists is effective in preventing CINV among adults receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Various treatment options are available, but direct head-to-head comparisons do not allow comparison of all treatments versus another.  OBJECTIVES: • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving HEC - To compare the effects of antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids on prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in network meta-analysis (NMA) - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving MEC - To compare whether antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids are superior for prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting to treatment combinations including 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists and corticosteroids solely, in network meta-analysis - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings, and study registries from 1988 to February 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs including adults with any cancer receiving HEC or MEC (according to the latest definition) and comparing combination therapies of NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors and corticosteroids for prevention of CINV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We expressed treatment effects as risk ratios (RRs). Prioritised outcomes were complete control of vomiting during delayed and overall phases, complete control of nausea during the overall phase, quality of life, serious adverse events (SAEs), and on-study mortality. We assessed GRADE and developed 12 'Summary of findings' tables. We report results of most crucial outcomes in the abstract, that is, complete control of vomiting during the overall phase and SAEs. For a comprehensive illustration of results, we randomly chose aprepitant plus granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for HEC, and granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for MEC.

MAIN RESULTS

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) We included 73 studies reporting on 25,275 participants and comparing 14 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 704 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (39 RCTs, 21,642 participants; 12 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron for completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): fosnetupitant + palonosetron (810 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.37; moderate certainty), aprepitant + palonosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.98  to 1.18; low-certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21; low certainty), and fosaprepitant + palonosetron (746 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19; low certainty).  Netupitant + palonosetron (704 of 1000; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; high-certainty) and fosaprepitant + granisetron (697 of 1000; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06; high-certainty) have little to no impact on complete control of vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant + ondansetron (676 of 1000; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.05; low certainty), fosaprepitant + ondansetron (662 of 1000; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.04; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (634 of 1000; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; low certainty), rolapitant + granisetron (627 of 1000; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01; moderate certainty), and rolapitant + ondansetron (598 of 1000; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.12; low certainty). We could not include two treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 35 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (23 RCTs, 16,065 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that fewer participants may experience SAEs when treated with the following drug combinations than with aprepitant + granisetron: fosaprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.07; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.39; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (9 of 1000; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.58; low certainty), fosaprepitant + granisetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.50; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (20 of 1000; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.70; low certainty). Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of aprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.14; very low certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (11 of 1000; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.90; very low certainty), fosaprepitant + palonosetron (12 of 1000; RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.95; very low certainty), fosnetupitant + palonosetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.16; very low certainty), and aprepitant + palonosetron (17 of 1000; RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.05 to 4.78; very low certainty) on the risk of SAEs when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  We could not include three treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron, rolapitant + ondansetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) We included 38 studies reporting on 12,038 participants and comparing 15 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors, or 5-HT₃ inhibitors solely. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 555 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with granisetron. Evidence from NMA (22 RCTs, 7800 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): aprepitant + palonosetron (716 of 1000; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.66; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (694 of 1000; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.70; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (660 of 1000; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.33; high certainty).  Palonosetron (588 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) and aprepitant + granisetron (577 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) may or may not increase complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron, respectively. Azasetron (560 of 1000; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.34; low certainty) may result in little to no difference in complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron. Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): fosaprepitant + ondansetron (500 of 100; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22; low certainty), aprepitant + ondansetron (477 of 1000; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.17; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (461 of 1000; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.12; low certainty), and ondansetron (433 of 1000; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty). We could not include five treatment combinations (fosaprepitant + granisetron, azasetron, dolasetron, ramosetron, tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 153 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with granisetron. Evidence from pair-wise comparison (1 RCT, 1344 participants) suggests that more participants may experience SAEs when treated with rolapitant + granisetron (176 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.50; low certainty). NMA was not feasible for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Certainty of evidence Our main reason for downgrading was serious or very serious imprecision (e.g. due to wide 95% CIs crossing or including unity, few events leading to wide 95% CIs, or small information size). Additional reasons for downgrading some comparisons or whole networks were serious study limitations due to high risk of bias or moderate inconsistency within networks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This field of supportive cancer care is very well researched. However, new drugs or drug combinations are continuously emerging and need to be systematically researched and assessed. For people receiving HEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest one superior treatment for prevention and control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.  For people receiving MEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest superiority for treatments including both NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors when compared to treatments including 5-HT₃ inhibitors only. Rather, the results of our NMA suggest that the choice of 5-HT₃ inhibitor may have an impact on treatment efficacy in preventing CINV.  When interpreting the results of this systematic review, it is important for the reader to understand that NMAs are no substitute for direct head-to-head comparisons, and that results of our NMA do not necessarily rule out differences that could be clinically relevant for some individuals.

Influence of CYP2D6 metabolizer status on ondansetron efficacy in pediatric patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A case series

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is commonly experienced by patients receiving antineoplastic agents prior to hemopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Ondansetron, a 5‐HT3 antagonist metabolized by CYP2D6, is an antiemetic prescribed to treat short‐term CINV, but some patients still experience uncontrolled nausea and vomiting while taking ondansetron. Adult CYP2D6 ultrarapid metabolizers (UMs) are at higher risk for CINV due to rapid ondansetron clearance, but similar studies have not been performed in pediatric patients. We performed a retrospective chart review of 128 pediatric HSCT recipients who received ondansetron for CINV prevention and had CYP2D6 genotyping for 20 alleles and duplication detection. The number of emetic episodes for each patient was collected from the start of chemotherapy through 7 days after HSCT. The average age of the cohort was 6.6 years (range: 0.2–16.7) and included three UMs, 72 normal metabolizers, 47 intermediate metabolizers, and six poor metabolizers. Because UMs are the population at risk for inefficacy, we describe the course of treatment for these three patients, as well as the factors influencing emesis: chemotherapy emetogenicity, diagnosis, and duration of ondansetron administration. The cases described support guidelines recommending non‐CYP2D6 metabolized antiemetics (e.g., granisetron) when a patient is a known CYP2D6 UM, but pediatric studies with a larger sample of CYP2D6 UMs are needed to validate our findings.

Evaluation of Adherence to Antiemetic Treatment Guidelines in Patients With Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Teaching Hospitals in Tehran

The present study evaluated adherence to antiemetic guidelines for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in four tertiary university teaching hospitals in Tehran. This prospective observational study enrolled 382 adult patients on chemotherapy at oncology centers affiliated to medical universities located in Tehran. Patients were followed up during their chemotherapy cycles. Risk factors related to CINV were evaluated, and information on antiemetic prescribing patterns was gathered using direct interview and patient medical records. Guideline adherence was found to be low; however, 81.3% of the patients experienced chemotherapy without CINV. Low frequency of adherence to the guidelines in prescription patterns does not mean that prescription patterns were very different. Indeed, some drugs were added to base guideline recommendation regiments, since in high and moderate emetogenic chemotherapy categories, some novel antiemetics recommended by international guidelines are not yet included in Iranian pharmacopeia. It was shown that two drug classes were added as a common practice, namely, H1/H2 antagonists and dopamine receptor antagonist (metoclopramide). Statistically significant differences were found between antiemetic prescribing patterns of physicians and chemotherapy regimen category (aspect of emetogenic potential) (p < 0.001). The most commonly prescribed regimen in the minimal-emetic-risk category and the low-emetic-risk category was reported to be the combination of corticosteroids, 5HT3, and H1/H2 antagonists, 33% and 66.1% respectively. Moreover, corticosteroids +5HT3 and H1/H2 antagonists + NK1 antagonist were found to be the most frequently prescribed regimen in the moderate-emetic-risk category (39.7%) and high-emetic-risk category (41.8%). Antiemetic prescribing patterns were not completely compatible with the guidelines in moderate and high emetogenic chemotherapy categories. Differences were detected in two states of over- and undertreatment. The present study confirmed low level of adherence of antiemetic prescribing patterns with international guidelines. However, it could not be proved that high levels of adherence with the guidelines result in reduction of CINV incidence. Complete success in CINV control cannot be achieved only by adherence to the established guidelines as novel antiemetics recommended by the guidelines have not been included in the Iranian pharmacopeia as yet. The authors do recommend implementation of strategies for increasing guideline-compliant prescriptions with the aim of improving patients' outcomes. We also suggest that policymakers in healthcare system point more critically to overprescribing as an issue of concern.

The Balance Between the Effectiveness and Safety for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting of Different Doses of Olanzapine (10 mg Versus 5 mg): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to rigorously review the efficacy and safety of olanzapine in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) settings including (1) at 5- and 10-mg doses, and (2) the setting of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).

METHODS

Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library were searched from the establishment of the database through April 18, 2021. The primary efficacy endpoints were the rate of complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue), in the acute (0-24 h post-chemotherapy), delayed (24-120 h post-chemotherapy), and overall (0-120 h post-chemotherapy) phases. The secondary efficacy endpoints were the rates of complete control (CC, no nausea, and no emesis), for each phase. Safety endpoints were the rate of somnolence, as assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) criteria. The Mantel-Haenszel, random, or fixed-effect analysis model was used to compute risk ratios and accompanying 95% confidence intervals for each endpoint. For endpoints that statistically favored one arm, absolute risk differences were computed to assess whether there is a 10% or greater difference, used as the threshold for clinical significance by MASCC/ESMO.

RESULT

Nine studies reported the use of 10 mg olanzapine to prevent CINV; three studies reported the use of 5 mg olanzapine to prevent CINV. When olanzapine was administered at 10 mg for HEC patients, the six endpoints were statistically and clinically better than the control group. For MEC patients, four out of six endpoints were better than the control group. When olanzapine is administered at 5 mg for MEC patients, four endpoints have statistical and clinical advantages. The sedative effects of 10 and 5 mg olanzapine were statistically more significant than those of the control group. The sedative effect of the 10-mg olanzapine group was more significant than that of the 5-mg olanzapine group, both statistically and clinically.

CONCLUSION

5 mg olanzapine may be as effective as 10 mg olanzapine for patients with HEC and MEC, and its sedative effect is lower than 10 mg olanzapine. Fewer studies on 5 mg olanzapine have led to uncertain data. In the future, more randomized controlled trials of 5 mg olanzapine are needed to study the balance between the effectiveness and safety of olanzapine.

An Update in Our Understanding of the Relationships Between Gene Polymorphisms and Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

The occurrence and severity of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are influenced by many factors; this includes therapeutic factors, such as the dose, administration mode, and chemotherapeutic agent emetogenicity, as well as patient-related risk factors, such as the gender, age, alcohol consumption history, and anxiety level. However, these factors cannot fully explain the individual CINV differences. In recent years, the correlation between gene polymorphism and CINV has been a hot research topic; the present paper reviews current research on CINV-related gene polymorphisms, and the results indicate that the use of gene polymorphism for the optimization of CINV efficacy is of important clinical significance.

Investigation of the risk factors of vomiting during linezolid therapy: a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Some clinical studies have reported the occurrence of nausea and vomiting with linezolid (LZD) administration. However, no studies have evaluated nausea and vomiting as primary endpoints. In a previous study, we noted a possible relationship between LZD and vomiting, but risk factors were not identified. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to identify them.

METHODS

Patients who received LZD 600 mg twice daily at Hokkaido University Hospital from September 2008 to April 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. Patient characteristics, concomitant medications, laboratory data, and the occurrence of vomiting were obtained from electronic medical records. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for vomiting, including age, sex, body weight, concomitant medications, and surgeries.

RESULTS

A total of 496 patients were included in this study, of which 90 experienced vomiting. By multivariate logistic regression analysis, female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.62-4.47), ≥ 10 days of LZD administration (aOR, 2.57; CI, 1.46-4.50), and hyponatraemia (aOR, 2.96; CI, 1.72-5.10) were identified as independent risk factors for vomiting; administration of serotonergic agents (aOR, 0.23; CI, 0.07-0.82) was negatively associated.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to successfully identify risk factors for LZD-induced vomiting. Careful monitoring of patients with these risk factors may lead to safer and sustainable LZD administration.

Quality of life of patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy in hospitals in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil: does individual characteristics matter?

This study aims to evaluate changes in quality of life of cancer patients at the beginning of the first and the second cycle of chemotherapy (CT) in hospitals in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Longitudinal, prospective, descriptive study with a quantitative approach. We enrolled 230 patients, from a broader cohort, diagnosed with the five most frequent types of cancer (breast, colorectal, cervical, lung, and head and neck), aged 18 years or older, who were initiating CT for the first time. quality of life was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 version 3, applied at the beginning of the first and second chemotherapy cycle. The paired Wilcoxon test was used to identify differences in quality of life between the two time points. A multivariate linear regression analysis was performed using the bootstrap method to investigate potential predictors of global health Status/quality of life. There was a significant increase in patients' emotional function scores (p < 0.001) as well as symptom scores for pain (p = 0.026), diarrhea (p = 0.018), and nausea/vomiting (p < 0.001) after initiation of CT. Widowhood was associated with improvements in the global health Status/quality of life (p = 0.028), whereas the presence of cervical cancer (p = 0.034) and being underweight (p = 0.033) were related to poorer global health status/quality of life scores. CT has detrimental effects on patients' physical health but, on the other hand, it leads to improvements in the emotional domain. Patients' individual characteristics at the beginning of CT are associated with changes in their quality of life. Our study could help identify these characteristics.

Administration of a Probiotic Mixture Ameliorates Cisplatin-Induced Mucositis and Pica by Regulating 5-HT in Rats

Probiotic-based therapies have been shown to be beneficial for chemotherapy-induced mucositis. Previous research has demonstrated that a probiotic mixture (Bifidobacterium brevis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, and Streptococcus thermophilus) can ameliorate chemotherapy-induced mucositis and dysbiosis in rats, but the underlying mechanism has not been completely elucidated. We aimed to determine the inhibitory effects of the probiotic mixture on cisplatin-induced mucositis and pica and the underlying mechanism, focusing on the levels of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT, serotonin) regulated by the gut microbiota. A rat model of mucositis and pica was established by daily intraperitoneal injection of cisplatin (6 mg/kg) for 3 days. In the probiotic+cisplatin group, predaily intragastric injection of the probiotic mixture (1 × 109 CFU/kg BW) was administrated for 1 week before cisplatin injection. This was then followed by further daily probiotic injections for 6 days. Histopathology, pro-/anti-inflammatory cytokines, oxidative status, and 5-HT levels were assessed on days 3 and 6. The structure of the gut microbiota was analyzed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and quantitative PCR. Additionally, 5-HT levels in enterochromaffin (EC) cells (RIN-14B cell line) treated with cisplatin and/or various probiotic bacteria were also determined. The probiotic mixture significantly attenuated kaolin consumption, inflammation, oxidative stress, and the increase in 5-HT concentrations in rats with cisplatin-induced intestinal mucositis and pica. Cisplatin markedly increased the relative abundances of Enterobacteriaceae_other, Blautia, Clostridiaceae_other, and members of Clostridium clusters IV and XIVa. These levels were significantly restored by the probiotic mixture. Importantly, most of the genera increased by cisplatin were significantly positively correlated with colonic 5-HT. Furthermore, in vitro, the probiotic mixture had direct inhibitory effects on the 5-HT secretion by EC cells. The probiotic mixture protects against cisplatin-induced intestine injury, exhibiting both anti-inflammatory and antiemetic properties. These results were closely related to the reestablishment of intestinal microbiota ecology and normalization of the dysbiosis-driven 5-HT overproduction.

Use of Systemic Corticosteroids for Reasons Other than Asthma in Subjects with Asthma

BACKGROUNDS

Recent studies have reported increased risks of adverse events from systemic corticosteroids even with only low-dose or short-term use. Some patients with asthma experience complications requiring systemic corticosteroids. However, few studies have examined issues associated with administration of systemic corticosteroids for reasons other than asthma among subjects with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated patterns of systemic corticosteroid exposure for reasons other than asthma in subjects with asthma.

METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed the records of adult subjects with asthma followed up for >1 year at Yokohama City University Hospital from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019. We investigated patterns and reasons for systemic corticosteroid use during follow-up. In addition, factors related to systemic corticosteroid use for reasons likely other than asthma were investigated.

RESULTS

Among the 568 subjects with asthma analyzed, 326 (57.4%) had received systemic corticosteroids for some reason. Among those 326 patients, 120 (36.8%) had received systemic corticosteroids for reasons likely other than asthma. Multivariable analysis revealed rheumatoid arthritis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, other collagen vascular diseases, chronic rhinosinusitis, and malignancy as positively associated with systemic corticosteroid exposure for reasons likely other than asthma in subjects with asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

About 40% of systemic corticosteroid use in subjects with asthma was for reasons likely other than asthma. Clinicians should be aware of their asthma patients' exposures to systemic corticosteroids for nonasthma reasons, to avoid missing adverse events or underestimating the severity of asthma, and to reduce systemic corticosteroid use.

Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy and Diabetes: A Scoping Review

Although cancer and diabetes are common diseases, the relationship between diabetes, neuropathy and the risk of developing peripheral sensory neuropathy while or after receiving chemotherapy is uncertain. In this review, we highlight the effects of chemotherapy on the onset or progression of neuropathy in diabetic patients. We searched the literature in Medline and Scopus, covering all entries until 31 January 2021. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were: (1) original article (2) full text published in English or Spanish; (3) neuropathy was specifically assessed (4) the authors separately analyzed the outcomes in diabetic patients. A total of 259 papers were retrieved. Finally, eight articles fulfilled the criteria, and four more articles were retrieved from the references of the selected articles. The analysis of the studies covered the information about neuropathy recorded in 768 cancer patients with diabetes and 5247 control cases (non-diabetic patients). The drugs investigated are chemotherapy drugs with high potential to induce neuropathy, such as platinum derivatives and taxanes, which are currently the mainstay of treatment of various cancers. The predisposing effect of co-morbid diabetes on chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy depends on the type of symptoms and drug used, but manifest at any drug regimen dosage, although greater neuropathic signs are also observed at higher dosages in diabetic patients. The deleterious effects of chemotherapy on diabetic patients seem to last longer, since peripheral neuropathy persisted in a higher proportion of diabetic patients than non-diabetic patients for up to two years after treatment. Future studies investigating the risk of developing peripheral neuropathy in cancer patients with comorbid diabetes need to consider the duration of diabetes, cancer-induced neuropathic effects per se (prior chemotherapy administration), and the effects of previous cancer management strategies such as radiotherapy and surgery.

Efficacy and Safety of Adding Olanzapine to the Standard Preventive Regimen for Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting in Children: A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Trial

This study aimed to assess the additive value of olanzapine to a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in pediatric patients. A total of 40 patients between 4 to 18 years of age were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. Both groups received a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone, and 0.14 mg/kg olanzapine or matched placebo were administered for olanzapine and control groups, respectively. The primary end points were complete response and lack of nausea as far as three days after chemotherapy evaluated by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Effects (CTCAE) v5.0 and the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Anti-emesis Tool (MAT). Side effects of olanzapine were also analyzed. In patients receiving the standard regimen of ondansetron and dexamethasone, nausea was observed in 10.5% and 21% of patients according to MAT and CTCAE scales, respectively. In the olanzapine group, 37.5% (MAT scale) and 31.3% (CTCAE scale) of patients developed nausea. Complete response was observed in 84% (MAT scale) and 94.7% (CTCAE scale) of patients in the placebo group receiving ondansetron and dexamethasone. In comparison, it was observed in 87.5% (MAT scale) and 81.25% (CTCAE scale) for patients allocated to the olanzapine group. Neither acute nor delayed CINV was statistically different between placebo and olanzapine groups. The frequency of adverse effects was higher in the olanzapine group. Adding olanzapine to the standard regimen of CINV prophylaxis was only unhelpful in pediatric patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy but also associated with a higher rate of minor side effects.

Psychological predictors of chemotherapy-induced nausea in women with breast cancer: Expectancies and perceived susceptibility

Objective

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea is challenging to predict and treat. Research indicates that pretreatment psychological variables including patients' perceptions of their susceptibility to nausea, expectancies of treatment‐related nausea and nausea history (i.e., motion sickness, morning sickness and baseline levels of nausea) may aid in predicting nausea severity during chemotherapy. However, this research is dated and limited in quantity. We investigated whether psychological variables could improve prediction of nausea severity to inform interventions targeting chemotherapy‐induced nausea.

Methods

In this secondary analysis, a subgroup of women receiving chemotherapy (for the first time) for breast cancer completed pretreatment measures: perceived nausea susceptibility, nausea expectancies, nausea history and baseline nausea. They rated subsequent nausea severity across 4‐days, during treatment and posttreatment in a self‐report diary. Structural Equation Modelling was used to explore associations.

Results

Across the women (N = 481), perceived nausea susceptibility predicted subsequent nausea severity (β = 0.16), but nausea expectancies did not (β = 0.05). Nausea history variables demonstrated small‐moderate associations with perceived susceptibility (β = 0.21–0.32) and negligible‐small associations with nausea expectancies (β = 0.07–0.14).

Conclusion

Perceived nausea susceptibility appears to capture patients' nausea history, to a degree, and is related to nausea severity during treatment. This is an important variable to include in pretreatment prediction of patients at risk of severe nausea.

Carbohydrate-Based NK1R Antagonists with Broad-Spectrum Anticancer Activity

NK1R antagonists, investigated for the treatment of several pathologies, have shown encouraging results in the treatment of several cancers. In the present study, we report on the synthesis of carbohydrate-based NK1R antagonists and their evaluation as anticancer agents against a wide range of cancer cells. All of the prepared compounds, derived from either d-galactose or l-arabinose, have shown high affinity and NK1R antagonistic activity with a broad-spectrum anticancer activity and an important selectivity, comparable to Cisplatin. This strategy has allowed us to identify the galactosyl derivative 14α, as an interesting hit exhibiting significant NK1R antagonist effect (kinact 0.209 ± 0.103 μM) and high binding affinity for NK1R (IC50 = 50.4 nM, Ki = 22.4 nM by measuring the displacement of [125I] SP from NK1R). Interestingly, this galactosyl derivative has shown marked selective cytotoxic activity against 12 different types of cancer cell lines.

Effectiveness of Inhaled Aromatherapy on Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Systematic Review

Background: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are among the most common and feared side effects of cancer treatments. Their presence has a negative impact on the quality of life and morbidity associated with the disease. Despite increasingly effective antiemetic treatments, 40% of cancer patients experience CINV during the acute or delayed phase of their treatment. This distressing experience lived through by a large number of people makes it a priority in the improvement of cancer patients and a daily concern for nurses in cancer care units. In an attempt to alleviate this problem, the idea of using aromatherapy as supportive care has led the authors to research the knowledge available on this subject. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the existing scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of respiratory aromatherapy on CINV in addition to standard treatment compared with their recommended management in people with cancer. Design: Systematic review. Methods: This review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and queried six databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Database, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar). An analysis of the risk of bias using the Cochrane "Risks of Bias" tools and a qualitative synthesis of the results of the studies were carried out. Results: Eleven studies were included, nine in adults and two in children. Seven out of nine studies showed statistically significant results in adults with either direct or dry inhalation. Four out of seven alleviated both nausea and vomiting thanks to peppermint, ginger essential oil; three decreased nausea only with chamomilla, ginger or cardamom essential oil. Atmospheric diffusion and the use of inhaled aromatherapy in children did not show any benefit. Conclusions: Results appear promising for the use of direct inhaled aromatherapy in the management of CINV. However, most of the studies found the women concerned suffered from gynecologic cancers and had certain methodological limitations. Indeed, small samples and a wide variety of interventions were studied (different essential oils, number of drops of essential oils used, method of administration, etc.), making it impossible so far to generalize these results. Studies with a more robust methodology and larger samples will make it possible to confirm the potential usefulness of this complementary treatment.

A Fast and Validated HPLC Method for the Simultaneous Analysis of Five 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists via the Quantitative Analysis of Multicomponents by a Single Marker

In this study, a new strategy for the simultaneous quantization of five serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists—ondansetron, azasetron, ramosetron, granisetron, and tropisetron—either in infusion samples or in injection dosage form was first established based on high-performance liquid chromatography combined with a quantitative analysis of multiple components by a single marker. The quantitative analysis of multicomponents by a single marker method was conducted with ondansetron as an internal reference substance and performed using relative retention time and ultraviolet spectral similarity as the double indicator. The quantitative analysis of the 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists was calculated and investigated based on the relative correction factors. Chromatographic separation was achieved using a C₁₈ column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5.0 μm), and the mobile phase was composed of acetonitrile-0.05 mol·L⁻¹ potassium dihydrogen phosphate (pH 4.0) (25 : 75) at a flow rate of 1.0 mL·min⁻¹ and detection wavelengths of 307 nm (ondansetron, azasetron, ramosetron), 302 nm (granisetron), and 285 nm (tropisetron). In addition, the accuracy of the quantitative analysis of multicomponents by a single marker method was compared with an external standard method, and no significant difference was observed between the two methods. The established method is rapid, is easy, and does not require many reference substances, and it can been successfully applied as part of the quality control of the five 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists in their injection dosage form and infusion sample drugs in hospitals.

Switching antifibrotics in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a multi-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are two antifibrotics used to treat idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF): pirfenidone and nintedanib. Antifibrotics slow disease progression by reducing the annual decline of forced vital capacity (FVC), which possibly improves outcomes in IPF patients. During treatment, patients occasionally switch antifibrotic treatments. However, prognostic implication of changing antifibrotics has not yet been evaluated.

METHODS

This multi-center retrospective cohort study examined 262 consecutive IPF patients who received antifibrotic therapy. Antifibrotic agents were switched in 37 patients (14.1%). The prognoses were compared between the patient cohort that switched antifibrotics (Switch-IPF) and those without (Non-Switch-IPF) using propensity-score matched analyses.

RESULTS

The median period between the initiation of antifibrotic therapy and the drug switch was 25.8 (12.7-35.3) months. The most common reasons for the switch were disease progression (n = 17) followed by gastrointestinal disorders (n = 12). Of the 37 patients that switched antifibrotics, only eight patients disrupted switched antifibrotics by their adverse reactions. The overall prognosis of the Switch-IPF cohort was significantly better than the Non-Switch-IPF cohort (median periods: 67.2 vs. 27.1 months, p < 0.0001). In propensity-score matched analyses that were adjusted to age, sex, FVC (%), history of acute exacerbation, and usage of long-term oxygen therapy, the Switch-IPF cohort had significantly longer survival times than the Non-Switch-IPF group (median 67.2 vs. 41.3 months, p = 0.0219). The second-line antifibrotic therapy showed similar survival probabilities than those in first-line antifibrotic therapy in multistate model analyses.

CONCLUSION

Switching antifibrotics is feasible and may improve prognosis in patients with IPF. A further prospective study will be required to confirm clinical implication of switching the antifibrotics.

A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonists (RAs), administered in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃ ) RA and dexamethasone (DEX), have demonstrated clear improvements in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention over a 5-HT₃ RA plus DEX. However, studies comparing the NK₁ RAs in the class are lacking. A fixed combination of a highly selective NK₁ RA, netupitant, and the 5-HT₃ RA, palonosetron (NEPA), simultaneously targets two critical antiemetic pathways, thereby offering a simple convenient antiemetic with long-lasting protection from CINV. This study is the first head-to-head NK₁ RA comparative study in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, single-cycle, open-label, prospective study designed to demonstrate noninferiority of single-dose NEPA to a 3-day aprepitant regimen in preventing CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving AC/non-AC MEC in a real-life setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (no emesis/no rescue) during the overall (0-120 hour) phase. Noninferiority was achieved if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference between NEPA and the aprepitant group was greater than the noninferiority margin set at -10%.

RESULTS

Noninferiority of NEPA versus aprepitant was demonstrated (risk difference 9.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to 20.7%); the overall complete response rate was numerically higher for NEPA (64.9%) than aprepitant (54.1%). Secondary endpoints also revealed numerically higher rates for NEPA than aprepitant.

CONCLUSION

This pragmatic study in patients with cancer receiving AC and non-AC MEC revealed that a single dose of oral NEPA plus DEX was at least as effective as a 3-day aprepitant regimen, with indication of a potential efficacy benefit for NEPA.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In the absence of comparative neurokinin 1 (NK₁ ) receptor antagonist (RA) studies, guideline committees and clinicians consider NK₁ RA agents to be interchangeable and equivalent. This is the first head-to-head study comparing one NK₁ RA (oral netupitant/palonosetron [NEPA]) versus another (aprepitant) in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Noninferiority of NEPA versus the aprepitant regimen was demonstrated; the overall complete response (no emesis and no rescue use) rate was numerically higher for NEPA (65%) than aprepitant (54%). As a single-dose combination antiemetic, NEPA not only simplifies dosing but may offer a potential efficacy benefit over the current standard-of-care.

Artificial Nutrition in Patients with Advanced Malignancy

Cancer is a progressive disease that can lead to malnutrition and cachexia. Artificial nutrition is a medical therapy used to combat malnutrition in these patients. In this article, the authors discuss factors affecting the decision to use artificial nutrition, including the patient's mental and physical health, technical factors of the procedures used to deliver artificial nutrition, and the oncologic factors affecting treatment. Through this review, the authors provide guidelines on who is and is not likely to benefit from therapy, available routes of administration, and necessary factors to consider for appropriate decision-making for palliative patients and those with advanced cancers."

Therapeutic Potential of Cannabidiol, Cannabidiolic Acid, and Cannabidiolic Acid Methyl Ester as Treatments for Nausea and Vomiting

Introduction: Nausea and vomiting are the most distressing symptoms reported by oncology patients undergoing anticancer treatment. With the currently available treatments, vomiting and especially nausea remain problematic, highlighting the need for alternative treatments. Discussion: Here we review in vitro and in vivo evidence for the effectiveness of the nonpsychoactive cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) in managing nausea and vomiting. In addition, we also review the evidence for CBD's acidic precursor, cannabidiolic acid (CBDA), and a methylated version of CBDA (CBDA-ME) in these phenomena. Finally, we explore the potential role of CBD in the treatment of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. Conclusions: CBD has demonstrated efficacy in reducing nausea and vomiting, with CBDA and CBDA-ME being more potent. The data suggest a need for these compounds to be evaluated in clinical trials for their ability to reduce nausea and/or vomiting.

Practice Patterns for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting and Antiemetic Guideline Adherence Based on Real-World Prescribing Data

BACKGROUND

Guideline-recommended antiemetic prophylaxis improves nausea and vomiting control in most patients undergoing chemotherapy. Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/European Society for Medical Oncology (MASCC/ESMO) antiemetic guidelines recommend prophylaxis with a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA), a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA), and dexamethasone for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), including anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)- and carboplatin (considered moderately emetogenic chemotherapy)-based chemotherapy. Here, we analyze the use of NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis associated with HEC and carboplatin.

METHODS

The data source was the Global Oncology Monitor (Ipsos Healthcare). Geographically representative physicians from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the U.K. were screened for treatment involvement and number of patients treated per month. Patients' data from January to December 2018 were collected from medical charts and extrapolated on the basis of the total number of physicians who prescribe chemotherapy. The emetic risk of chemotherapy was classified per MASCC/ESMO guidelines.

RESULTS

Data from 45,324 chemotherapy-treated patients were collected, representing a total extrapolated prevalence of 1,394,848 chemotherapy treatments included in the analysis. NK1 RAs were used in 45%, 42%, and 19% of patients receiving cisplatin-, AC-, and carboplatin-based chemotherapy, respectively; 18%, 24%, and 7% received the guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone combination; no antiemetics were prescribed for 12% of the treatments. Often, physicians' perception of the emetic risk of chemotherapy did not follow MASCC/ESMO guideline classification.

CONCLUSION

Low adherence to antiemetic guidelines was revealed in clinical practice in five European countries, with 15% of all HEC-/carboplatin-based treatments receiving guideline-recommended NK1 RA-5-HT3 RA-dexamethasone prophylaxis and 12% of them receiving no antiemetics. New strategies for improving guideline adherence are urgently needed.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Despite recent advances in antiemetic therapy, a substantial proportion of patients experience nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy in daily clinical practice. Antiemetic guidelines aim at prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and guideline-consistent antiemetic therapy can effectively prevent vomiting and, to a lesser extent, nausea in most patients with cancer. This study reports low adherence to antiemetic guidelines in the highly emetogenic chemotherapy setting in daily clinical practice across five European countries. Opportunity exists to increase adherence to antiemetic guideline recommendations. Implementation of strategies to facilitate guideline adherence can potentially improve CINV control.

Single daily dosing versus divided dosing intravenous ondansetron to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among children: A comparative randomized double-blind controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common complication in cancer treatment. Ondansetron is an effective antiemetic drug widely used to prevent CINV; however, the effective administrative dosing strategies among pediatrics remain unclear. The study aimed to investigate clinical effectiveness of single daily dosing versus divided dosing ondansetron.

METHODS

In all, 194 children undergoing chemotherapy were randomized to receive either single daily dosing (0.3 mg/kg/dose) or divided dosing (0.15 mg/kg/dose every 8 hours) intravenous ondansetron for 24 hours. Clinical parameters including number of emesis episodes, nausea scores, appetite levels, parent's satisfaction, and adverse effects within 24 hours were analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two dosing strategies concerning number of emesis episodes and parent's satisfaction. However, nonleukemic hematologic malignancies and concurrent administration of intrathecal methotrexate-hydrocortisone-cytarabine (IT-MHA) were associated with increased risk of acute-phase vomiting. Interestingly, none of the patients aged under 7 years, receiving divided dosing ondansetron, presented nausea symptoms compared with those receiving single daily dosing (p-value .034). No significant differences regarding headache were observed between the two dosing strategies and none of the patients experienced QTc prolongation.

CONCLUSION

Ondansetron administered as divided dosing should be considered among children aged under 7 years to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and among patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy to maintain their appetite. Both administrative dosing strategies were well tolerated with no significant adverse effects.

The effectiveness of NEPA in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting among chemo naive patients in an Indian setting

Background

Chemotherapy induced nausea- vomiting (CINV) is considered as the most common, feared and most troublesome side effect of chemotherapy. NEPA (NEtupitant 300 mg + PAlonosetron 0.50 mg) is the first commercially available oral fixed-dose combination (FDC) of two active antiemetic agents in India. The present study was planned to evaluate the effectiveness of NEPA in the real world setting of India.

Methods

This was a multicentric retrospective study conducted in two centers in India. The data of all chemonaive patients, who were prescribed NEPA was analyzed. Effectiveness i.e. complete response and complete protection in controlling overall, acute and delayed phase was analyzed.

Results

A total of 329 patients were enrolled in the study. 260 received highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) regimen and 69 received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimen. Among all the enrolled patients, complete response in acute, delayed and overall phase was 93, 85.71 and 85.41% respectively; and completed protection was 88.44, 81.76 and 80.54% respectively. Those who received HEC regimen, the completed response and complete protection in overall phase was 84.61 and 79.61% respectively and those who received MEC regimen the completed response and complete control in overall phase was 84.05 and 84.05% respectively.

Conclusion

A single oral dose of NEPA targeting dual pathways showed effective control of nausea-vomiting in patients on the HEC and MEC regimens and had good control over nausea-vomiting in acute, delayed and overall phase of nausea-vomiting.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the real-world setting in Spain

Purpose

Proper monitoring and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with antiemetics is crucial for cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the use of antiemetics for the treatment of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) including carboplatin in the real-world setting in Spain.

Methods

A representative panel of cancer specialists was asked to collect information about the antiemetic treatments provided to patients receiving chemotherapy. Records formed part of the Global Oncology Monitor^© database (Ipsos Healthcare, London, UK). Chemotherapy data were extrapolated using Ipsos Healthcare’s projection methodology.

Results

A total of 73 experts were finally included. Data from 9519 patients, estimated to be representative of 202,084 patients, were collected. HEC (and carboplatin-based chemotherapy) was administered to 73,118 (36%) patients, cisplatin-based therapy being the most frequent treatment (n = 34,649, 47.38%). Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK₁RAs) alone or in combination were used as prophylaxis for CINV in 14,762 (20%) patients, while the combination of NK₁RA with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT₃RAs) and dexamethasone as recommended by the international guidelines was used in 5849 (8%) patients only. No antiemetic prophylaxis was administered to 8.46% of the patients receiving HEC (n = 6189). Physicians classified cisplatin-, anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC-), and carboplatin-based regimens as HEC in 63%, 22% and 4% of the cases, respectively.

Conclusions

The use of NK₁RA-containing regimens for CINV prevention in patients treated with HEC was less than expected, suggesting poor adherence to international antiemetic guidelines.

The HCN Channel Blocker ZD7288 Induces Emesis in the Least Shrew (Cryptotis parva)

Subtypes (1-4) of the hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channels are widely expressed in the central and peripheral nervous systems, as well as the cells of smooth muscles in many organs. They mainly serve to regulate cellular excitability in these tissues. The HCN channel blocker ZD7288 has been shown to reduce apomorphine-induced conditioned taste aversion on saccharin preference in rats suggesting potential antinausea/antiemetic effects. Currently, in the least shew model of emesis we find that ZD7288 induces vomiting in a dose-dependent manner, with maximal efficacies of 100% at 1 mg/kg (i.p.) and 83.3% at 10 µg (i.c.v.). HCN channel subtype (1-4) expression was assessed using immunohistochemistry in the least shrew brainstem dorsal vagal complex (DVC) containing the emetic nuclei (area postrema (AP), nucleus tractus solitarius and dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus). Highly enriched HCN1 and HCN4 subtypes are present in the AP. A 1 mg/kg (i.p.) dose of ZD7288 strongly evoked c-Fos expression and ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the shrew brainstem DVC, but not in the in the enteric nervous system in the jejunum, suggesting a central contribution to the evoked vomiting. The ZD7288-evoked c-Fos expression exclusively occurred in tryptophan hydroxylase 2-positive serotonin neurons of the dorsal vagal complex, indicating activation of serotonin neurons may contribute to ZD7288-induced vomiting. To reveal its mechanism(s) of emetic action, we evaluated the efficacy of diverse antiemetics against ZD7288-evoked vomiting including the antagonists/inhibitors of: ERK1/2 (U0126), L-type Ca2+ channel (nifedipine); store-operated Ca2+ entry (MRS 1845); T-type Ca2+ channel (Z944), IP3R (2-APB), RyR receptor (dantrolene); the serotoninergic type 3 receptor (palonosetron); neurokinin 1 receptor (netupitant), dopamine type 2 receptor (sulpride), and the transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 receptor agonist, resiniferatoxin. All tested antiemetics except sulpride attenuated ZD7288-evoked vomiting to varying degrees. In sum, ZD7288 has emetic potential mainly via central mechanisms, a process which involves Ca2+ signaling and several emetic receptors. HCN channel blockers have been reported to have emetic potential in the clinic since they are currently used/investigated as therapeutic candidates for cancer therapy related- or unrelated-heart failure, pain, and cognitive impairment.

The efficacy and safety of auricular acupuncture versus electroacupuncture in ameliorating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among patients receiving cisplatin-based regimens

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are among the most common and distressing side effects of chemotherapy. Difference in views about the effectiveness of auricular acupuncture (AA) versus electroacupuncture (EA) of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) lies at the heart of the debate. The aim of this study is to compare the antiemetic efficacy and safety of AA and EA for CINV.

METHODS

One hundred twenty participants, 18 to 75 years old malignant tumors will receiving chemotherapy with cisplatin, will be recruited and randomized into 3 groups equally, Group A (the AA group), Group B (the EA group), and Group C (the control group). The participants in Group A and Group B will receive AA or EA regimens, alternatively, beginning on the day before first day of chemotherapy for a third consecutive cycles. All participants will continue to receive conventional treatment. The incidence and severity of CINV will be assessed using the definition and classification of nausea and vomiting (NCI-CTC AE4.0) and the MASCC (Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer) Antiemesis Tool (MAT). Secondary outcome measures include the degree of abdominal distension, the first time of flatus and defecation, and life quality. Additionally, adverse events will also be documented during the period of the treatment.

DISCUSSION

This trial may provide evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness and safety of AA versus EA for CINV following cisplatin-based regimens.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000040942.

The trichothecene neosolaniol stimulates an emetic response through neuropeptide Y2 and serotonin 3 receptors in mink

Type A trichothecene neosolaniol (NEO) is considered a potential risk to human and animal health by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). To date, available data do not allow making conclusions about the toxicological properties of this toxin. Trichothecenes have been previously demonstrated to induce emetic responses in mink, and this response has been associated with neurotransmitter peptide YY (PYY) and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT). The goal of this study was to compare emetic effects of NEO administered by intraperitoneal and oral routes and relate these effects to PYY and 5-HT. The effective doses resulting in emetic events in 50% of the animals following intraperitoneal and oral exposure to NEO were 0.4 and 0.09 mg/kg bw, respectively. This emetic response corresponded to elevated PYY and 5-HT levels. Blocking the neuropeptide Y2 receptor diminished emesis induction by PYY and NEO. The 5-HT3 receptor inhibitor granisetron completely restrained the induction of emesis by 5-HT and NEO. To summarize, our findings demonstrate that PYY and 5-HT play important roles in the NEO-induced emetic response.

Predictors for development of denosumab-induced hypocalcaemia in cancer patients with bone metastases determined by ordered logistic regression analysis

This retrospective study was undertaken to identify predictors for the development of hypocalcaemia even with prophylactic administration of calcium and vitamin D, and to help guide future strategies to improve the safety, efficacy, and QOL of patients receiving denosumab. Between January 2016 and February 2020, a total of 327 advanced cancer patients at our hospital who were receiving denosumab were enrolled. Variables associated with the development of hypocalcaemia were extracted from the clinical records. The level of hypocalcaemia was evaluated using CTCAE version 5. Multivariate ordered logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors for the development of hypocalcaemia. Optimal cut off thresholds were determined using ROC analysis. Values of P < 0.05 (2-tailed) were considered significant. 54 patients have developed hypocalcemia (≥ Grade 1). Significant factors identified included concomitant use of vonoprazan [odds ratio (OR) = 3.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14–12.26; P = 0.030], dexamethasone (OR = 2.45, 95%CI 1.14–5.42; P = 0.022), pre-treatment levels of serum calcium (OR = 0.27, 95%CI 0.13–0.54; P < 0.001), ALP/100 (OR = 1.04, 95%CI 1.01–1.07; P = 0.003), and haemoglobin (OR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.68–0.93; P = 0.004). ROC curve analysis revealed that the threshold for pre-treatment levels of serum calcium was ≤ 9.3 mg/dL, ALP was ≥ 457 U/L, and haemoglobin was ≤ 10.4 g/dL. In conclusion, concomitant use of vonoprazan or dexamethasone, and pre-treatment levels of serum calcium (low), ALP (high) and haemoglobin (low) were identified as significant predictors for the development of denosumab-induced hypocalcaemia.

Evaluating the incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with B-cell lymphoma receiving dose-adjusted EPOCH and rituximab

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating antiemetic prophylaxis have primarily focused on the solid tumor setting and single-day regimens. This study evaluates antiemetic prophylaxis and chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with lymphoma receiving a multiday doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide containing regimen.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single center, cohort study evaluating patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma receiving dose-adjusted R-EPOCH in the hospital. Data was collected from the electronic medical record from April 2016 to September 2019. Complete response over 120 hours was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included complete response during the acute and delayed phases as well as complete control.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients who received dose adjusted R-EPOCH were identified. Most patients (n = 39, 53%) were male with a the median age was 63 years (range: 21-81). Most patients received ondansetron 16 mg once daily (n = 48, 66%) on days 1-5 as antiemetic prophylaxis with a minority receiving either dexamethasone (n = 8) or an NK1 antagonist (n = 13) in addition to ondansetron. Complete response rate was 32% and the complete response in the acute and delayed phase was also 32%.

CONCLUSION

Control of CINV in patients with lymphoma hospitalized to receive dose-adjusted R-EPOCH was suboptimal, with only 32% of patients achieving complete response. Nearly three-quarters of patients received only a 5HT3 receptor antagonist as scheduled antiemetic therapy without an NK1 receptor antagonist. This data supports the importance of improving awareness of regarding multiday CINV guidelines and ensuring timely update and implementation of these evidence-based guidelines.

Efficacy of Auricular Acupressure in Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

More than 40% of patients with cancer have reported that chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remained the most debilitating side effects of treatment even in the era of new antiemetics.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate the clinical effect of auricular acupressure (AA) in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, the Web of Science, Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP (from database inception to April 2020). Eligible randomized controlled trials of auricular acupressure in treating CINV were collected, including crossover randomized design study. The meta-analysis was carried out by RevMan software (5.3).

RESULTS

Totally 19 RCTs with 1449 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with control groups, the relief efficiency of overall CINV was enhanced by AA combined with antiemetics (RR = 1.31, CI 1.22 to 1.41, p ≤ 0.001). Although the therapeutic effect on acute nausea and vomiting was not obvious, AA still played an important role in reducing delayed nausea and vomiting (delayed nausea frequency: RR = 0.68, CI -1.01 to -1.35, p ≤ 0.001; delayed vomiting frequency: RR = 0.91, CI -1.22 to -0.61, p ≤ 0.001). The likelihood of adverse reactions related to antiemetics was reduced by AA combined with antiemetics (RR = 0.62, CI 0.53 to 0.74, p ≤ 0.001). Statistically significant association was found between AA and incidence of constipation, diarrhea, and tiredness, while there was no statistically significant association between AA and abdominal distension or headache.

CONCLUSION

Auricular acupressure supplementation benefited delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting as well as constipation, diarrhea, and tiredness. AA alone or AA supplementation has little effect on acute nausea and acute vomiting. There is no conclusion on whether AA alone is superior to antiemetics in the management of delayed CINV. Further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of auricular acupressure alone in delayed CINV and anticipatory CINV. The results of this review provided the basis for further research with more rigorous study designs, adequate sample sizes, and standardized implementation to confirm the efficacy of auricular acupressure.

Elevated serum substance P level as a predictive marker for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A prospective cohort study

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is an unbearable side effect. Identifying high emetic risk patients and providing more active antiemetics strategies are mandatory to improve the tolerability of chemotherapy. In this prospective cohort study, leptin, ghrelin, and substance P were measured at baseline, day 3, and day 14 during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Nausea and vomiting were measured each day for the first 4 days of the first cycle of chemotherapy. Eighty‐two patients were enrolled. Colorectal cancer (61%) and gastric cancer (35.4%) were common cancer types. All patients received moderate emetic risk chemotherapy. Forty‐five (54.9%) patients had nausea, and 15 (18.3%) patients experienced vomiting. In univariate analysis, a higher level of baseline substance P, which is a target of NK1‐RA (Neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist), was a significant predictive marker for chemotherapy‐induced nausea [odds ratio (OR): 2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02–6.62, p = 0.046]. Regarding chemotherapy‐induced vomiting, patients with higher levels of substance P had a greater chance of vomiting [OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.49–5.99, p = 0.395] than those with lower levels of substance P. In patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy, active antiemetics, including NK1‐RA, could be considered for those with high levels of substance P.

Study protocol for SPARED trial: randomised non-inferiority phase III trial comparing dexamethasone on day 1 with dexamethasone on days 1-4, combined with neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, palonosetron and olanzapine (5 mg) in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Dexamethasone (DEX) is administered for multiple days to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC); however, its notorious side effects have been widely reported. Although our multicentre randomised double-blind comparative study verified non-inferiority of sparing DEX after day 2 of chemotherapy when combined with neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1-RA) and palonosetron (Palo) for patients receiving HEC regimen, DEX sparing was not non-inferior in patients receiving cisplatin (CDDP)-based HEC regimens in subgroup analysis. Recently, the efficacy of the addition of olanzapine (OLZ) to standard triple antiemetic therapy on HEC has been demonstrated by several phase III trials. This study aims to confirm non-inferiority of DEX sparing when it is combined with NK-1RA, Palo and OLZ in patients receiving CDDP-based HEC regimens.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a randomised, double-blind, phase III trial. Patients who are scheduled to receive CDDP ≥50 mg/m² as initial chemotherapy are eligible. Patients are randomly assigned to receive either DEX on days 1-4 or DEX on day 1 combined with NK1-RA, Palo and OLZ (5 mg). The primary endpoint is complete response (CR) rate, defined as no emesis and no rescue medications during the delayed phase (24-120 hours post-CDDP administration). The non-inferiority margin is set at -15.0%. We assume that CR rates would be 75% in both arms. Two hundred and sixty-two patients are required for at least 80% power to confirm non-inferiority at a one-sided significance level of 2.5%. After considering the possibility of attrition, we set our final required sample size of 280.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The institutional review board approved the study protocol at each of the participating centres. The trial result will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000032269.

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Pathogenesis, Recommendations, and New Trends

The significant physical and emotional effects of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are experienced by cancer patients. Severe symptoms decrease the patient's quality of life and potentially deters further treatment. The five main forms of CINV (i.e., acute, delayed, anticipatory, breakthrough, and refractory) require different treatment regimens, which often include 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids. Despite a significant amount of research and development of antiemetic agents, management of CINV remains a great challenge with many needs waiting to be adequately addressed, such as controlling non-acute CINV, developing appropriate CINV treatment protocols for multiple-day chemotherapy patients, and providing options for those prone to CINV despite treatment. Further research is required to optimize CINV management for these patients.

Unintended Effects of GPCR-Targeted Drugs on the Cancer Phenotype

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most common class of therapeutic targets, accounting for ~35% of all FDA-approved drugs. Cancer patients receive numerous medications not only to combat cancer but also to alleviate pain, nausea, and anxiety, many of which target GPCRs. Emerging evidence has implicated GPCRs as drivers of cancer progression, therapeutic resistance, and metastasis. Therefore, the effects of commonly prescribed GPCR-targeted drugs must be reevaluated in the context of cancer. Epidemiological and experimental evidence indicate that widely used GPCR-targeted drugs may promote or inhibit cancer progression. It is crucial that we more fully understand the indirect effects of GPCR-targeted drugs on the cancer phenotype. This review summarizes recent advances in characterizing these interactions and highlights future research opportunities.

Dexamethasone prevents TACE-induced adverse events: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While dexamethasone has been applied following transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for years, its clinical effects have not been determined. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone in preventing adverse events induced by TACE.

METHODS

Literature retrieval was conducted using globally recognized online databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dexamethasone application in patients undergoing TACE. The relative odds ratios (ORs) of incidence rates of three adverse events, namely, fever, abdominal pain and nausea/vomiting, were calculated. The value of I was applied to evaluate the heterogeneity of the trials, and the overall publication bias was assessed with Egger test.

RESULTS

Four RCTs containing 350 subjects were included for the pooled estimation. Dexamethasone significantly reduced the incidence rate of TACE-induced adverse events (OR = 1.237, 95% CI: 1.170-1.308, P < .001) with moderate heterogeneity (I = 46.0%). The result of Egger test revealed a publication bias for the included studies.

CONCLUSION

The current meta-analysis confirmed the efficacy of dexamethasone in preventing TACE-induced adverse events. To confirm the practicality of dexamethasone use with TACE, further studies with large sample sizes are warranted to update the evidence-based analyses.

Exploring the Use of State Medical Cannabis Legislation as a Proxy for Medical Cannabis Use Among Patients Receiving Chemotherapy

OPINION STATEMENT

The use of medical cannabis is expanding in the USA. Due to conflicting, low-quality evidence, many oncologists may not feel confident to recommend it to patients. Given the potential for legal and financial risks when conducting clinical trials with medical cannabis, the use of observational data should be explored. Observational data that directly capture medical cannabis use in relation to prescription medications and track the prevalence and patterns of cannabis use is sparse. To gain insights into the role medical cannabis plays in the pharmaceutical landscape, proxies such as cannabis legislation need to be explored. In the context of recommendation-nonadherent antiemetic prescribing among patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, medical cannabis may be a suitable alternative to an antiemetic in states that allow medical cannabis. Findings suggest that legislation may impact the use of certain antiemetics in states with cannabis legislation in place. The presence or absence of legislation regarding medical cannabis use may serve as an early, observable surrogate marker of medical cannabis use in the community. In light of the paucity of clinical trials and observational datasets that capture cannabis use, there remains a tremendous need for the development of methodologies or standardized datasets that appropriately and reliably capture the use of medical cannabis to facilitate research into its clinical application and effect on prescription medication use. Standardizing the reporting and destigmatizing use could eliminate the dependence upon proxy measures as a substitute for more extensive data and go a long way in improving data capture, thus allowing us to generate knowledge and hypotheses from observational data until research conditions improve and allow for expanded clinical trials involving medical cannabis.

Olanzapine for Prevention of Vomiting in Children and Adolescents Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: Investigator-Initiated, Randomized, Open-Label Trial

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant toxicity of chemotherapy. Olanzapine is recommended in adult patients for the prevention of CINV but has not been prospectively investigated in children.

METHODS

This investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label trial evaluated olanzapine in children (ages 5-18 years) scheduled to receive the first cycle of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). All participants received aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone during and 2 days after chemotherapy. Participants in the study group additionally received oral olanzapine 0.14 mg/kg/day (rounded to the nearest 2.5 mg; maximum, 10 mg) during the chemotherapy block and 3 days postchemotherapy. The primary objective was to compare complete response (CR) rates (no vomiting and no rescue medication) between the groups in the acute, delayed, and overall periods. Nausea comparison and safety evaluation were secondary and additional objectives, respectively. The collection of outcomes and adverse events was performed daily until the completion of the overall period.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients underwent randomization. We performed a modified intention-to-treat analysis on 231 patients (116 in the control group and 115 in the study group). A higher proportion of patients in the olanzapine group achieved CR in the acute period (78% v 59%; P = .001), delayed period (74% v 47%; P < .001) and overall period (64% v 38%; P < .001) than in the control group. The proportion of patients with no nausea was significantly higher in the olanzapine group in the acute period (74% v 52%; P < .001), delayed period (74% v 47%; P < .001), and overall period (64% v 37%; P < .001). Grade 1/2 somnolence was greater in the olanzapine group (35% v 11%; P < .001). There was no grade 3/4 somnolence reported.

CONCLUSION

Olanzapine significantly improved CR rates for vomiting in children receiving the first cycle of HEC.

The Role of Nutritional Support in Cured/Chronic Patients

Improvements in Clinical Oncology, due to earlier diagnoses and more efficient therapeutic strategies, have led to increased numbers of long-term survivors, albeit many with chronic diseases. Dealing with the complex care needs of these survivors is now an important part of Medical Oncology. Suitable diet and physical activity regimes will be important in maintaining their health. This paper will review what we know and what we can do in the near future for these patients.

Short-term fasting accompanying chemotherapy as a supportive therapy in gynecological cancer: protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial

Background/objectives

A few preliminary studies have documented the safety and feasibility of repeated short-term fasting in patients undergoing chemotherapy. However, there is a lack of data from larger randomized trials on the effects of short-term fasting on quality of life, reduction of side effects during chemotherapy, and a possible reduction of tumor progression. Moreover, no data is available on the effectiveness of fasting approaches compared to so-called healthy diets. We aim to investigate whether the potentially beneficial effects of short-term fasting can be confirmed in a larger randomized trial and can compare favorably to a plant-based wholefood diet.

Methods

This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, two-armed interventional study with a parallel group assignment. One hundred fifty patients, including 120 breast cancer patients and 30 patients with ovarian cancer, are to be randomized to one of two nutritional interventions accompanying chemotherapy: (1) repeated short-term fasting with a maximum energy supply of 350–400 kcal on fasting days or (2) repeated short-term normocaloric plant-based diet with restriction of refined carbohydrates. The primary outcome is disease-related quality of life, as assessed by the functional assessment of the chronic illness therapy measurement system. Secondary outcomes include changes in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score and as well as frequency and severity of chemotherapy-induced side effects based on the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events. Explorative analysis in a subpopulation will compare histological complete remissions in patients with neoadjuvant treatments.

Discussion/planned outcomes

Preclinical data and a small number of clinical studies suggest that repeated short-term fasting may reduce the side effects of chemotherapy, enhance quality of life, and eventually slow down tumor progression. Experimental research suggests that the effects of fasting may partly be caused by the restriction of animal protein and refined carbohydrates. This study is the first confirmatory, randomized controlled, clinical study, comparing the effects of short-term fasting to a short-term, plant-based, low-sugar diet during chemotherapy on quality of life and histological tumor remission.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03162289. Registered on 22 May 2017

An overview of acute gastrointestinal side effects of systemic anti-cancer therapy and their management

Treatment-related acute gastrointestinal toxicities are a common and often debilitating hurdle encountered in the treatment of cancer patients. While the introduction of targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors has led to improvements in survival outcomes, their use has also been complicated by a high frequency of clinically important adverse effects. Gastrointestinal toxicities such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and hepatotoxicity represent potentially serious adverse events that may necessitate dose reductions, treatment interruptions and cessation of treatment. An improved knowledge of the incidence, pathophysiology, management and prophylaxis of these toxicities is crucial in order to reduce patient morbidity and mortality. In this review, we discuss the main gastrointestinal toxicities associated with chemotherapy and targeted therapies in oncology, outlining their incidence, pathophysiology and expert management guidelines.

Preparation of an oil suspension containing ondansetron hydrochloride as a sustained release parenteral formulation

Ondansetron hydrochloride (ODS) is a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 antagonist for nausea and emesis prevention in neoplastic patients. To reduce dosing frequency and side effects and improve patient compliance, a sustained release parenteral formulation of ODS was developed. Microparticles of methylcellulose (MC) and ODS were prepared using the spray-drying method and suspended in oils to form oil suspensions. The formulations were evaluated for residual moisture, drug content, size distribution, DSC, XRD, FTIR, SEM, drug release, and pharmacokinetic studies. The effects of polymers and oils on the drug release were evaluated. MC showed the most prominent sustained release effect among various polymers examined with the optimum MC/ODS ratio of 2:1 (w/w). The particle size of the produced microparticles was in the mean diameter of approximately 3 μm. Physicochemical characterization suggested that ODS existed in an amorphous matrix within the microparticles and interacted with MC via hydrogen bonds. Corn oil was selected as the appropriate oil for suspension due to the sustained release of ODS and the appropriate viscosity. The optimized sustained release formulation of ODS was the corn oil suspension of spray-dried microparticles containing MC and ODS (2:1, w/w). It showed an in vitro drug sustained release up to 120 h, while the oil suspension of ODS without any polymer released the drug within 2 h. Following subcutaneous administration in rats, the optimized formulation could prolong the drug release until 72 h with the enhanced bioavailability in comparison with the ODS solution. The oil suspension of spray-dried microparticles might be an efficient approach for prolongation of the drug effect in the management of nausea and emesis. Graphical abstract.

Management of nausea and vomiting from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy for advanced ovarian cancer

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have rapidly emerged as a new class of daily oral chemotherapeutic agents that have the potential to dramatically alter the way in which primary peritoneal, fallopian tube and ovarian cancers are treated. However, the management of nausea and vomiting, the most common toxicities incurred by these agents, remains poorly understood. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of current guidelines, antiemetic agents and management steps for patients experiencing nausea and vomiting associated with the use of PARP inhibitors.

RNA-Seq reveals inflammatory mechanisms of Xiao-Ban-Xia-Tang decoction to ameliorate cisplatin-induced emesis in a rat pica model

OBJECTIVES

Xiao-Ban-Xia-Tang decoction (XBXT), an antiemetic formula in traditional Chinese medicine, has been proved to be a potential treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), but the underlying mechanisms are not adequately understood. This study aimed to investigate changes in the ileum transcriptome after cisplatin and XBXT treatment and to reveal whether the antiemetic mechanisms of XBXT are related to its anti-inflammatory effect.

METHODS

The pica model was established by a single intraperitoneal injection of 6 mg/kg cisplatin in Wistar rats. Tissues from the gastric antrum and ileum were stained with hematoxylin-eosin to observe gastrointestinal tract pathological changes. Based on the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) which were altered by cisplatin and reversed by XBXT, the transcriptome data of rat ileum were analyzed by GO, KEGG, and PPI analyses. Several inflammatory DEGs were validated by RT-PCR.

RESULTS

XBXT could reduce kaolin intake up to 72 h after modeling and alleviate the inflammatory damage of gastric antrum and ileum induced by cisplatin. According to the transcriptome profile, there were 75 DEGs down-regulated by cisplatin and up-regulated by XBXT and 343 DEGs up-regulated by cisplatin and down-regulated by XBXT. XBXT could blunt the overexpression of tryptophan hydroxylase 1 (the rate-limiting enzyme of serotonin synthesis) in ileum. Enrichment analysis showed that inhibiting overexpression of several conventional inflammation pathways and pro-inflammation cytokines were related to the antiemetic effectiveness of XBXT.

CONCLUSIONS

This study implies that inhibiting inflammatory signaling pathways and synthesis of serotonin might be potential mechanisms of XBXT's antiemetic effect against CINV.

Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Short Review on the Role of Netupitant-Palonosetron (NEPA)

Introduction

Antineoplastic drugs may induce several side effects, including chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Two neurotransmitters play a central role in mediating the emetic response: serotonin acting on the 5HT3 receptor and the substance P targeting the NK1 receptor. Indeed, a combination of a 5HT3 receptor antagonist (5HT3-RA) and a NK1 receptor antagonist (NK1-RA) together with dexamethasone has been shown to be very effective. In fact, this combination is actually widely used and recommended for CINV prophylaxis for highly emetogenic cisplatin-based adriamycin/cyclophosphamide (AC) and carboplatin-based regimens. NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) is the only fixed combination antiemetic available and it is composed by the long-lasting second-generation 5HT3-RA palonosetron and the highly selective NK1-RA netupitant.

Aim

The aims of this short review were to analyze the role of NEPA in CINV prophylaxis and management taking in account the risk factors related to the patient and to the antineoplastic treatment.

Evidence Review

CINV development is not only correlated to the emetogenic potential of the antineoplastic drugs but is also very influenced by the patient characteristics and history, such as gender, age, alcohol intake, nausea during pregnancy and motion sickness. In pivotal and post-registration studies, NEPA has demonstrated to be effective and safe in both highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Conclusion

A proper assessment of both chemotherapy- and patient-related risk factors is paramount to properly evaluate an appropriate prophylaxis of CINV and NEPA by simplifying the therapy, guarantees fully adherence to antiemetic guidelines, and consequently improves the control of CINV, especially in high risk patients.

Type A Trichothecene Diacetoxyscirpenol-Induced Emesis Corresponds to Secretion of Peptide YY and Serotonin in Mink

The trichothecene mycotoxins contaminate cereal grains and have been related to alimentary toxicosis resulted in emetic response. This family of mycotoxins comprises type A to D groups of toxic sesquiterpene chemicals. Diacetoxyscirpenol (DAS), one of the most toxic type A trichothecenes, is considered to be a potential risk for human and animal health by the European Food Safety Authority. Other type A trichothecenes, T-2 toxin and HT-2 toxin, as well as type B trichothecene deoxynivalenol (DON), have been previously demonstrated to induce emetic response in the mink, and this response has been associated with the plasma elevation of neurotransmitters peptide YY (PYY) and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT). However, it is found that not all the type A and type B trichothecenes have the capacity to induce PYY and 5-HT. It is necessary to identify the roles of these two emetogenic mediators on DAS-induced emesis. The goal of this study was to determine the emetic effect of DAS and relate this effect to PYY and 5-HT, using a mink bioassay. Briefly, minks were fasted one day before experiment and given DAS by intraperitoneally and orally dosing on the experiment day. Then, emetic episodes were calculated and blood collection was employed for PYY and 5-HT test. DAS elicited robust emetic responses that corresponded to upraised PYY and 5-HT. Blocking the neuropeptide Y2 receptor (NPY2R) diminished emesis induction by PYY and DAS. The serotonin 3 receptor (5-HT3R) inhibitor granisetron totally restrained the induction of emesis by serotonin and DAS. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that PYY and 5-HT have critical roles in DAS-induced emetic response.

Efficacy of acupuncture in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced cancer: a multi-center, single-blind, randomized, sham-controlled clinical research

Background

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common and distressing side effect. We conducted this clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of true acupuncture vs. sham acupuncture in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients with advanced cancer.

Methods

A total of 134 participants were randomly allocated into true acupuncture (TA) (n = 68) and sham acupuncture (SA) (n = 66) groups. Participants in both groups received acupuncture session twice on the first day of chemotherapy, and once consecutively on the following 4 days. The primary outcome was using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) to assess CINV. The secondary outcome measures were the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score (ECOG), Simplified Nutritional Appetite Questionnaire (SNAQ), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS).

Results

Compared to the SA group, the TA group didn’t show significant improvement in complete response rates of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (all P > 0.05). However, the TA group could modestly reduce the severity of nausea (from day-3 to day-21, P < 0.05) or vomiting (from day-4 to day-21, P < 0.05), which is notably superior to the control group. Besides, TA promoted the nutritional status of patients with a significantly higher score comparing to the SA group on day 14 (21.82 vs.20.12, P = 0.003) and day 21 (22.39 vs. 20.43, P = 0.001). No apparent differences were found in anxiety and depression assessment between these groups. Participants in both groups were well tolerant of acupuncture therapy. There was no adverse event occurs in our study.

Conclusion

Acupuncture as an adjunctive approach could alleviate the severity of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting compared to the sham control, even though the effect of acupuncture in preventing CINV occurring is relatively modest.