2016 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Following High Emetic Risk Chemotherapy

Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide clinicians, adults with cancer, caregivers, researchers, and oncology institutions on the medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids, including synthetic cannabinoids and herbal cannabis derivatives; single, purified cannabinoids; combinations of cannabis ingredients; and full-spectrum cannabis.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cohort studies on the efficacy and safety of cannabis and cannabinoids when used by adults with cancer. Outcomes of interest included antineoplastic effects, cancer treatment toxicity, symptoms, and quality of life. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to January 27, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 13 systematic reviews and five additional primary studies (four RCTs and one cohort study). The certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Cannabis and/or cannabinoid access and use by adults with cancer has outpaced the science supporting their clinical use. This guideline provides strategies for open, nonjudgmental communication between clinicians and adults with cancer about the use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids. Clinicians should recommend against using cannabis or cannabinoids as a cancer-directed treatment unless within the context of a clinical trial. Cannabis and/or cannabinoids may improve refractory, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when added to guideline-concordant antiemetic regimens. Whether cannabis and/or cannabinoids can improve other supportive care outcomes remains uncertain. This guideline also highlights the critical need for more cannabis and/or cannabinoid research.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Risk Factors Associated with Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Among Women with Breast Cancer Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: Individual Patient-Based Analysis of Three Prospective Antiemetic Trials

Purpose

Although risk factors related to chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) have been identified in previous studies, only a few studies have evaluated the risk factors associated with contemporary antiemetic prophylaxis, including olanzapine/aprepitant- or NEPA-containing regimens. This study aimed to identify the risk factors associated with CINV development in Chinese breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy.

Methods

Data from 304 patients enrolled in 3 previously reported prospective antiemetic studies were included. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to predict risk factors associated with CINV occurrence. Additionally, the likelihood of treatment failure in relation to the number of risk factors in individual patients was evaluated.

Results

Multivariate analysis of the entire study group revealed that obesity status (defined as body mass index/= 25.0 kg/m2) and the use of olanzapine/aprepitant- or NEPA-containing anti-emetic regimens were associated with a high likelihood, while a history of motion sickness was associated with a lower likelihood, complete response (CR), and "no nausea" in the overall phase. A history of vomiting during pregnancy was also associated with a lower likelihood of an overall CR. Patients with an increasing number of risk factors had a higher likelihood of treatment failure and shorter time to first vomiting. Those who did not achieve CR and "no nausea" in the first cycle were less likely to achieve these parameters in the subsequent cycle of chemotherapy.

Conclusion

The present study confirmed previously reported risk factors for CINV in Chinese breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide. Further optimization of CINV control is required for patients with identifiable risk factors; olanzapine/aprepitant- or NEPA- containing prophylaxis are the preferred contemporary anti-emetics regimens for Chinese breast cancer patients undergoing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy.

2023 MASCC and ESMO guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

•Nausea and vomiting are considered amongst the most troublesome adverse events for patients receiving antineoplastics. •The guideline covers emetic risk classification, prevention and management of treatment-induced nausea and vomiting. •The Consensus Committee consisted of 34 multidisciplinary, health care professionals and three patient advocates. •Recommendations are based on evidence-based data (level of evidence) and the authors’ collective expert opinion (grade). •All recommendations are for the first course of antineoplastic therapy; modifications may be needed in subsequent courses.

Dexamethasone-free antiemetic strategy for highly emetogenic chemotherapy: safety and efficacy-pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Dexamethasone sparing strategies have shown success. The feasibility of a dexamethasone-free antiemetic strategy remains undetermined. A prospective, single-arm, pilot study was planned to determine the efficacy of an olanzapine-based, dexamethasone-free, three-drug antiemetic regimen.

METHODS

Chemotherapy naïve, adult patients (≥18 years) who received ondansetron, aprepitant and olanzapine during the first cycle of highly emetogenic chemotherapy were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the rate of complete response (CR: no vomiting and no use of rescue medications) during the overall period (0-120 hours).

RESULTS

Out of the total of 101 patients enrolled, most were women (82%) and received anthracycline cyclophosphamide (73%) combination therapy. The rate of CR for the overall period was 65% (95% CI 55.2% to 74.5%). The rate of CR for the acute and delayed period was 79% (95% CI 70% to 86.7%) and 76% (95% CI 66.7% to 84.1%). The rate of nausea control rates for the acute, delayed and overall periods were 34%, 29% and 24%, respectively. The grade I, II and III sedation rates over the 5 days were 8%, 5% and 1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The dexamethasone-free antiemetic strategy showed modest efficacy with low incidence of clinically significant somnolence. There is a need to prospectively investigate the role of dexamethasone in the era of newer potent antiemetics in a randomised fashion.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTRI/2021/07/034813.

Dexamethasone-Free Antiemetic Prophylaxis for Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Double-Blind, Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial (CINV POD study)

PURPOSE

The effectiveness of a dexamethasone (DEX)-free regimen for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) is not known.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, phase III trial designed to show the noninferiority of a DEX-free regimen (olanzapine, palonosetron, and fosaprepitant [OPF]) compared with the DEX-containing regimen (olanzapine, palonosetron, and DEX [OPD]). Chemotherapy-naïve patients age 18-80 years receiving single-day HEC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either the OPD regimen or the OPF regimen. The primary objective was to compare complete response (CR) rates for vomiting during the overall period (start of chemotherapy to 120 hours). Secondary objectives included CR for vomiting during the acute period (0-24 hours) and delayed period (24-120 hours), CR for nausea, and comparison of toxicities and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-six patients received the study interventions, 174 in the OPD arm and 172 in the OPF arm. The DEX-free OPF arm had significantly higher CR rates for vomiting compared with the DEX-containing OPD arm in acute (94.7% v 85.6%; P < .004), delayed (81.9% v 50.5%; P < .001), and overall (79.6% v 48.8%; P < .001) periods. For nausea, CR rates in the OPF arm were higher in delayed (53.4% v 39.6%; P = .009) and overall (50.5% v 39.1%; P = .031) periods but not in the acute period (77.9% v 81.6%; P = .39). Fatigue (P = .009) and drowsiness (P = .002) were more in the OPF arm in the acute period and insomnia (P < .001) in the OPD arm in the overall period.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that a DEX-free OPF regimen is efficacious and should be considered a standard option for acute and delayed CINV prophylaxis for HEC.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: prevention of nausea and vomiting following high-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents

PURPOSE

This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine, dacarbazine, mechlorethamine, streptozocin, and cyclophosphamide in doses of > 1500 mg/m2 and the combination of cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline (AC) in women with breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review report following the PRISMA guidelines of the literature from January 1, 2015, until February 1, 2023, was performed. PubMed (Ovid), Scopus (Google), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. The literature search was limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Forty-six new references were determined to be relevant. The main topics identified were (1) steroid-sparing regimens, (2) olanzapine-containing regimens, and (3) other issues such as comparisons of antiemetics of the same drug class, intravenous NK1 receptor antagonists, and potentially new antiemetics. Five updated recommendations are presented.

CONCLUSION

There is no need to prescribe steroids (dexamethasone) beyond day 1 after AC HEC, whereas a 4-day regimen is recommended in non-AC HEC. Olanzapine is now recommended as a fixed part of a four-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen in both non-AC and AC HEC. No major differences between 5-HT3 receptor antagonists or between NK1 receptor antagonists were identified. No new antiemetic agents qualified for inclusion in the updated recommendations.

Nutritional Management of Oncological Symptoms: A Comprehensive Review

Throughout their experience of illness and during the course of treatment, a substantial proportion of cancer patients are prone to develop nutritional and/or metabolic disturbances. Additionally, cancer patients often encounter long-term side effects from therapies, which may lead to impaired digestion, nutrient absorption or bowel motility. Therefore, the preservation and maintenance of an optimal and balanced nutritional status are pivotal to achieving a better prognosis, increasing the tolerance and adherence to cancer therapies and improving the overall quality of life. In this context, personalized nutritional programs are essential for addressing conditions predisposing to weight loss, feeding difficulties, digestion problems and intestinal irregularity, with the goal of promoting adequate nutrient absorption and minimizing the detrimental effects of treatment regimens. The focus of this research is to examine the most common clinical conditions and metabolic changes that cancer patients may experience, including stomatitis, xerostomia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, sub-occlusion, dysgeusia, dysosmia, anorexia, and cachexia. Furthermore, we present a pragmatic example of a multidisciplinary workflow that incorporates customized recipes tailored to individual clinical scenarios, all while maintaining the hedonic value of the meals.

Choosing the appropriate pharmacotherapy for breast cancer during pregnancy: what needs to be considered?

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy during pregnancy. Breast cancer during pregnancy is a challenging clinical condition requiring proper and timely multidisciplinary management.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy with a focus about the current state-of-the-art on the feasibility and safety of pharmacotherapy approaches in this setting.

EXPERT OPINION

Multidisciplinary care is key for a proper diagnostic-therapeutic management of breast cancer during pregnancy. Engaging patients and their caregivers in the decision-making process is essential and psychological support should be provided. The treatment of patients with breast cancer during pregnancy should follow the same recommendations as those for breast cancer in young women outside pregnancy but taking into account the gestational age at the time of treatment.Anthracycline-, cyclophosphamide-, and taxane-based regimens can be safely administered during the second and third trimesters with standard protocols, preferring weekly regimens whenever possible. Endocrine therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and targeted agents are contraindicated throughout pregnancy, also due to the very limited data available to guide their administration in this setting. During treatment, careful fetal growth monitoring is mandatory, and even after delivery proper health monitoring for the children exposed in utero to chemotherapy should be continued.

Efficacy of 3-day versus 5-day aprepitant regimens for long-delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is an ongoing problem. While effectiveness of triplet antiemetic regimens in the delayed CINV phase (24-120 hours after administration of chemotherapy) has been studied, their effectiveness in the long-delayed phase (120-168 hours post-administration) is unknown. We compared the efficacy of 3- and 5-day courses of a triplet antiemetic prophylaxis containing aprepitant (APR) in controlling long-delayed CINV after cisplatin (CDDP)-based chemotherapy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We obtained patient-level data from a nationwide, multicenter, prospective observational study in Japan. The incidence and timing of CINV after 3- and 5-day APR-containing regimens were compared using inverse probability treatment weighting.

RESULTS

The analysis included 380 patients. The incidence rates of long-delayed nausea and vomiting were significantly reduced for the 5-day compared with the 3-day regimen (29.1% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.0042; 6.7% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001, respectively). Among those without CINV, vomiting was not reported after day 2 in the 5-day APR group but increased after day 4 in the 3-day APR group.

CONCLUSION

A 5-day regimen triplet antiemetic prophylaxis with APR decreased long-delayed vomiting compared with a 3-day regimen in patients receiving CDDP-based chemotherapy. However, the 5-day regimen showed no advantage over the 3-day regimen against long-delayed nausea.

Supportive Care: The "Keystone" of Modern Oncology Practice

The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) defines supportive care as "the prevention and management of the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment. This includes management of physical and psychological symptoms and side effects across the continuum of the cancer journey from diagnosis through treatment to post-treatment care. Supportive care aims to improve the quality of rehabilitation, secondary cancer prevention, survivorship, and end-of-life care". This article will provide an overview of modern supportive care in cancer, discussing its definition, its relationship with palliative care, models of care, "core" service elements (multi-professional/multidisciplinary involvement), the evidence that supportive care improves morbidity, quality of life, and mortality in various groups of patients with cancer, and the health economic benefits of supportive care. The article will also discuss the current and future challenges to providing optimal supportive care to all oncology patients.

Fosnetupitant for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Short Review and Clinical Perspective

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is often ranked by patients as one of the most distressing and feared consequences of chemotherapy. The novel neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist fosnetupitant, a phosphorylated prodrug formulation of netupitant, was approved in Japan in 2022. Fosnetupitant is one of the standard treatments for the prevention of CINV in patients who are receiving highly (any treatment where CINV occurs in more than 90% of patients) or moderately (where CINV occurs in 30-90% of patients) emetogenic chemotherapies. The aim of this commentary is to describe the mechanism of action, tolerability, and antiemetic efficacy of single-agent fosnetupitant in the prevention of CINV, and to discuss its clinical application, in order to aid optimal use.

Oral Dexamethasone Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Intravenous dexamethasone has been shown to reduce pain in total joint arthroplasty. This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial investigated the postoperative effects and safety of oral dexamethasone as a potential augment to multimodal pain management in outpatient knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

The authors prospectively randomized 109 consecutive patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty. Patients were assigned to Group A (57 patients) received 4 mg of dexamethasone by mouth twice per day starting postoperative day (POD) one for four days and Group B received placebo capsules. All healthcare professionals and patients were blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome was defined as postoperative pain scores. Secondary outcomes included 90-day postoperative complications, nausea and vomiting, daily opioid usage, assistance for ambulation, difficulty sleeping, and early patient reported outcomes. Demographics were similar between groups.

RESULTS

The patients who received dexamethasone had statistically significant decrease in VAS scores when averaging POD 1 to 4 (P=0.01). The average VAS scores among individual days were significantly lower with dexamethasone on POD 2, 3, and 4. While taking dexamethasone, morning and mid-day VAS scores were significantly lower. There was no difference between the groups with opioid use, nausea or vomiting, 90-day complications, ability to walk with/without assistance, difficulty sleeping, and early patient reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial demonstrated that oral dexamethasone following primary total knee arthroplasty can reduce postoperative pain. This may be a beneficial option in ambulatory surgery where intravenous limitations exist, but larger series are needed to further evaluate the safety profile in this population.

Loss of smell in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: Prevalence and relationship with food habit changes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cancer patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapies exhibit a series of adverse side effects including smell and taste alterations, which can have a significant impact on their food behavior and quality of life. Particularly, olfactory alterations are often underestimated, although declared as frequent by cancer patients. In the present study, we set out to examine loss of smell in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy and its relationship to food habits.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty-four bronchial cancer patients receiving cisplatin and 44 controls age and gender matched participants were tested for olfactory and gustatory functions using the European Test of Olfactory Capabilities and the Taste Strips test. Participants reported their food and dietary habits by filling a self-administered questionnaire. Patients were tested under two different sessions: i) before the beginning of the treatment, and ii) 6 weeks later, after 2 cycles of chemotherapy. Controls were tested under the same protocol with two sessions separated by 6 weeks.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The results highlighted decreased smell and taste abilities in almost half of the lung patients' group even before the exposition to Cisplatin. On a perceptual level, patients rated typical food odors as less edible compared to controls. Moreover, within the patients' group, hyposmics reported using more condiments, possibly as a compensatory mechanism to their decreased sensory abilities. Taken together, these findings showed that loss of smell is prevalent in lung cancer patients and is related to changes in dietary practices including seasoning. Future studies will provide a better understanding of these sensory compensation mechanisms associated with olfactory loss and their effects on food pleasure in this patient population.

Chemotherapy: how to reduce its adverse effects while maintaining the potency?

Chemotherapy is one of the widely used anticancer treatments that involves the use of powerful cytotoxic drugs to stop tumor growth by targeting rapidly dividing cells through various mechanisms, which will be elucidated in this review. Introduced during the early twentieth century, chemotherapy has since lengthened the longevity of innumerable cancer patients. However, the increase in lifespan is at the expense of quality of life as patients are at risk of developing short-term and long-term side effects following chemotherapy, such as alopecia (hair loss), chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, cardiotoxicity, diarrhea, infertility, and chemo brain. Currently, a number of these chemotherapy-induced adverse effects are managed through supportive care and approved treatments, while the rest of the side effects are unavoidable. Hence, chemotherapeutic drugs associated with inevitable side effects are only administered when their therapeutic role outweighs their chemotoxicity, thus severely limiting the potency of chemotherapy in treating malignancy. Therein, the potential approaches to alleviating side effects of chemotherapy ranging from pharmaceutical drugs to alternative therapies will be discussed in this review in hopes of increasing the tolerance and effectiveness of future chemotherapeutic treatments.

Efficacy and safety of antiemetic regimens for highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several regimens have been introduced in clinical practice in the last twenty years to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, direct comparative data remain insufficient, as many new regimes lack head-to-head comparisons. In this study, through an indirect comparison, we overcome this limit by providing the most up-to-date estimate of the efficacy and safety of all combinations used for HEC-induced nausea and vomiting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until June, 30th 2022. We included phase II-III RCTs, including adults with any cancer receiving HEC, and compared different antiemetic regimes to prevent CINV. The primary outcome was the overall complete response (defined as the absence of vomiting and of the use of rescue drugs from 0 to 120 hrs since chemotherapy); secondary outcomes were acute (absence of vomiting and use of rescue medicine 0-24 hrs after chemotherapy) and delayed (24-120 hrs) response and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 53 RCTs enrolling 22 228 patients were included. We classified the different antiemetic regimes into 21 different groups. Overall, 3- or 4-drug regimens containing a combination of dexamethasone, 5HT3 antagonists, mirtazapine or olanzapine with or without NK antagonists, yielded the highest probability to be the most effective regimen in terms of complete response. Regimens containing a combination of dexamethasone and 5-HT3 antagonist have the lowest probability of being the most effective regimen in terms of complete, acute, and delayed response.

CONCLUSION

In our network meta-analysis, 4-drug regimens with olanzapine displayed the highest probability of efficacy in terms of complete response. A 3-drug regimen with olanzapine represents a valid option in a limited resource context.

Validation of different personalized risk models of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results of a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of fosaprepitant for cancer patients treated with high-dose cisplatin

BACKGROUND

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy induces emesis in cancer patients without prophylaxis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fosaprepitant-based triple antiemetic regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with solid malignant tumors, determine risk factors and externally validate different personalized risk models for CINV.

METHODS

This phase III trial was designed to test the non-inferiority of fosaprepitant toward aprepitant in cancer patients who were to receive the first cycle of single-day cisplatin chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) during the overall phase (OP) with a non-inferiority margin of 10.0%. Logistic regression models were used to assess the risk factors of CR and no nausea. To validate the personalized risk models, the accuracy of the risk scoring systems was determined by measuring the specificity, sensitivity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), while the predictive accuracy of the nomogram was measured using concordance index (C-index).

RESULTS

A total of 720 patients were randomly assigned. CR during the OP in the fosaprepitant group was not inferior to that in the aprepitant group (78.1% vs. 77.7%, P = 0.765) with a between-group difference of 0.4% (95% CI, -5.7% to 6.6%). Female sex, higher cisplatin dose (≥ 70 mg/m² ), no history of drinking and larger body surface area (BSA) were significantly associated with nausea. The AUC for the acute and delayed CINV risk indexes was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.66-0.71) and 0.66 (95% CI: 0.61-0.70), respectively, and the C-index for nomogram CINV prediction was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.54-0.64). Using appropriate cutoff points, the three models could stratify patients with high- or low-risk CINV. No nausea and CR rate were significantly higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fosaprepitant-based triple prophylaxis demonstrated non-inferior control for preventing CINV in patients treated with cisplatin-base chemotherapy. Female cancer patients without a history of alcohol consumption, with larger BSA and received high-dose cisplatin might be more vulnerable to CINV. Three personalized prediction models were well-validated and could be used to optimize antiemetic therapy for individual patients.

A narrative review of the principal glucocorticoids employed in cancer

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are a pharmacological class of drugs widely used in oncology in both supportive and palliative settings. GCs differentially impact organs with immediate and long-term effects; with suppressive effect on the immune system anchoring their use to manage the toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In addition, GCs are often used in the management of symptoms related to cancer or chemotherapy and as adjuvants in the treatment of pain in the management of other. In the palliative setting, GCs, especially administered subcutaneously can be to assist in the control of nausea, dyspnea, asthenia, and anorexia-cachexia syndrome. In this narrative review, we aim to summarize the role of GCs in the different settings (curative, supportive, and palliative) to help clinicians use these important drugs in their daily clinical practice with cancer patients.

Optimizing treatment management of trastuzumab deruxtecan in clinical practice of breast cancer

Introduction

The antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) targets human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and has been evaluated in patients with HER2-positive unresectable/metastatic breast cancer in the phase II DESTINY-Breast01 trial (NCT03248492; DS8201-A-U201) and the randomized phase III DESTINY-Breast03 trial (NCT03529110; DS8201-A-U302). Approximately 20 additional studies are ongoing in breast cancer, including HER2-low breast cancer, and other solid tumor types within the DESTINY trial program. T-DXd has demonstrated a generally manageable safety profile, with low-grade hematologic and gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) among the most common; interstitial lung disease (ILD)/pneumonitis has been observed in patients receiving T-DXd and can be severe. This review discusses the management of common AEs and AEs of special interest in patients with HER2-positive unresectable/metastatic breast cancer, including nausea and vomiting, neutropenia, infusion-related reactions, alopecia, fatigue, ILD/pneumonitis, and left ventricular dysfunction.

Methods

Expert opinions, institutional protocols, and strategies to help optimize AE management and maximize the potential benefits of T-DXd in patients with breast cancer from five oncologists treating patients with T-DXd in North America and Europe are discussed.

Results

Prophylaxis for nausea and vomiting and proactive management of ILD/pneumonitis are especially important in treating patients with T-DXd. Management strategies for other T-DXd-related AEs of interest (e.g. neutropenia, infusion-related reactions, alopecia, fatigue, and left ventricular dysfunction) are also discussed.

Conclusions

This review provides context for understanding the usage, monitoring, and management practices of other health care providers and institutions with experience using T-DXd to help with safe and effective management of T-DXd-related AEs, particularly since the duration of T-DXd treatment may be quite long. Proper management of T-DXd-related AEs will allow optimal exposure and benefit from T-DXd and will help avoid premature discontinuation or improper dose reductions.

•

Adverse events (AEs) related to trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) are frequent but most commonly low grade and manageable.

•

Nausea and vomiting are among the most common treatment-emergent AEs.

•

Interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis is an important AE; proactive monitoring, diagnosis, and management are key.

•

Optimizing management of AEs with prophylaxis and effective therapies allows for maximizing the benefit from T-DXd therapy.

Compatibility and stability of methylprednisolone sodium succinate and granisetron hydrochloride in 0.9% sodium chloride solution

A combination of methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MSS) and granisetron hydrochloride (GH) is generally devoted to treating the chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. To date, none of these novel mixtures have been commercially available. The present study was aimed at investigating physical and chemical compatibility and stability of a combination of MSS with GH in 0.9% sodium chloride injection for 72 hours at 4°C and 25°C. A mixture of MSS (0.4-0.8 mg/mL) with GH (0.03 mg/mL) was prepared and stored in both polyvinyl chloride bags and glass bottles using 0.9% sodium chloride injection as a diluent. The study was performed using a validated and stability-indicating high-performance liquid chromatography method. The physical compatibility was assessed by a spectrometer. Furthermore, the pH measurement of each sample was measured electronically. All test solutions stored at 4°C or 25°C had a no >2% loss of the initial concentration throughout the 72-hour study period. All solutions remained clear and colorless throughout the study and were without precipitation or turbidity in any of the batches. The drug mixtures of MSS (0.4-0.8 mg/mL) and GH (0.03 mg/mL) in 0.9% sodium chloride injections were physically and chemically stable for at least 72 hours when stored at 4°C or 25°C in polyvinyl chloride bags or glass bottles.

The Clinical Observation of Acupuncture Combined With Antiemetic Drugs in the Prevention and Treatment of CINV in Breast Cancer Patients

Objective

The present study aimed to explore the effectiveness of acupuncture combined with antiemetic drugs in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among breast cancer patients receiving postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the clinical records of 81 postoperative breast cancer patients at our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021. These patients were divided into the acupuncture group and the control group. The efficacy of the antiemetic drugs combined with acupuncture for CINV was analysed. The primary endpoints were total, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting grade and remission rate. Safety and overall patient quality of life were secondary endpoints.

Results

During the whole observation period, compared with the control group, the frequency of nausea and vomiting was decreased in the acupuncture group (P=0.034). And the ECOG-PS score in the acupuncture group was significantly improved (P=0.004). In addition, the adverse events, such as abdominal (12.2% vs. 5.0%, P=0.252), distention (19.5% vs. 5.0%, P=0.049), and diarrhea (9.7% vs. 0, P=0.044), were decreased by acupuncture.

Conclusions

Acupuncture combined with antiemetics could reduce the incidence of CINV, improve the quality of life of patients and reduce the incidence of adverse side effects of antiemetic drugs.

Antiemetic prophylaxis for chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in locally advanced head and heck squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective phase II trial

Background

There is sparse research reporting effective interventions for preventing nausea and emesis caused by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC).

Methods

Treatment-naïve LA-HNSCC patients received intensity-modulated radiotherapy with concomitant cisplatin 100 mg/m² (33 mg/m²/days [d]1–3) every 3 weeks for two cycles. All patients were given oral aprepitant 125 mg once on d1, then 80 mg once on d2–5; ondansetron 8 mg once on d1; and dexamethasone 12 mg once on d1, then 8 mg on d2–5. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR). Pursuant to δ = 0.2 and α = 0.05, the expected CR rate was 80%.

Results

A total of 43 patients with LA-HNSCC were enrolled. The median age was 53 years, and 86.0% were male. All patients received radiotherapy and 86.0% of patients completed both cycles as planned. The overall CR rate was 86.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 72.1–94.7). The CR rates for cycles 1 and 2 were 88.4% (95% CI: 74.9–96.1) and 89.2% (95% CI: 74.6–97.0). The complete protection rate in the overall phase was 72.1% (95% CI: 56.3–84.7). The emesis-free and nausea-free responses in the overall phase were 88.4% (95% CI: 74.9–96.1) and 60.5% (95% CI: 44.4–75.0), respectively. The adverse events related to antiemetics were constipation (65.1%) and hiccups (16.3%), but both were grade 1–2. There was no grade 4 or 5 treatment-related toxicity with antiemetic usage.

Conclusion

The addition of aprepitant into ondansetron and dexamethasone provided effective protection from nausea and emesis in patients with LA-HNSCC receiving radiotherapy and concomitant high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.

Olanzapine (5 mg) plus standard triple antiemetic therapy for the prevention of multiple-day cisplatin hemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a prospective randomized controlled study

Objective

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare 5 mg olanzapine plus standard triple antiemetic therapy for the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy.

Methods

Patients who received a 3-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy (25 mg/m²/d) were given either 5 mg olanzapine plus triple therapy with aprepitant, tropisetron, and dexamethasone (quadruple group) or 5 mg olanzapine plus tropisetron and dexamethasone, omitting aprepitant (triplet group). The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) in the overall phase (OP) (0–120 h) between quadruple group and triplet group. The secondary endpoints were the CR in the acute phase (AP) (0–24 h) and delayed phase (DP) (25–120 h) between two groups. The first time of vomiting was also compared by Kaplan–Meier curves. The impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) on the quality of life was assessed by the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). Aprepitant-related adverse effects (AEs) were also recorded.

Results

(1) The primary endpoint CR during OP was 76.0% (45/59) vs 67.0% (41/61) between the quadruple group and triplet group (P = 0.271). The secondary endpoint CR during the AP was significantly higher in the quadruple group than in the triplet group, which was 100.0% (59/59) vs 93.0% (57/61) (P = 0.045). The difference of CR during delayed phase between the groups was especially higher in the quadruple group compared to the triplet group (76.0% (45/59) vs 67.0% (41/61) (P = 0.271)). The rate of patients who achieved total protection in the overall phase was also higher in the quadruple group than the triplet group (28.8% (17/59) vs 23.0% (14/61) (P = 0.463)). During the OP, the incidence of no vomiting in the quadruple group and the triplet group was 93.2% (55/59) vs 80.3% (49/61) (P = 0.038), respectively. (2) Kaplan–Meier curves of time to first emesis were obviously longer in the quadruple group compared with the triplet group (P = 0.031). According to FLIE, no impact of CINV on daily life was defined as total score of questionnaire > 108; this study exhibited identical life quality between two groups. (3) The most common aprepitant- or olanzapine-related AEs included sedation, fatigue, and constipation. The occurrences between two groups were identical.

Conclusion

It may been recommended that 5 mg olanzapine plus tropisetron and dexamethasone, omitting aprepitant triplet regimen as an alternative therapy in prevention CINV induced by multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy due to the excellent CINV control rate and safety.

Psychological Distress, Coping Strategies, and Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients Under Neoadjuvant Therapy: Protocol of a Systematic Review

Introduction

Women with breast cancer eligible for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) present a disorder of biopsychosocial variables and alteration of their quality of life. They cope with this changing by adopting psychological adjustment strategies, either passive or active. This systematic review aims to investigate the psychological distress, coping strategies, and quality of life in breast cancer patients under neoadjuvant therapy.

Methods

Cochrane Library, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Wiley Online library represent the databases that were searched to identify relevant published articles until September 27, 2021. Full-text published articles, written in English and assessing the main outcomes (namely: psychological distress, coping strategies, and quality of life) in women with breast cancer under NAT will be included. Also, we will integrate papers dealing with the related bio psychosocial variables to the main variables. The paper selection, data extraction, and quality assessment of selected studies will be performed independently by two researchers, and disagreements will be resolved through discussions. We will bring together the results of all of the included studies to draw conclusions based on the body of evidence. The narrative approach will be adopted to analyze the results and conclusions extracted and we would perform quantitative groupings if we have similar data.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval is not required as the proposed systematic review will not use primary data. The results of this review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentation(s). PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021230300.

A pooled analysis of adding olanzapine to guideline-recommended antiemetic therapy for breast cancer patients treated with an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide in prospective and retrospective studies

PURPOSE

As an antipsychotic agent that targets multiple neurotransmitter receptors, olanzapine has been added to antiemetic therapies. For better understanding the application of olanzapine in antiemetic strategies for breast cancer patients who suffered anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-induced nausea and vomiting, we comprehensively reviewed the antiemetic researches related to olanzapine and pooled-analyzed the results to confirm the efficacy and safety of olanzapine in breast cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from inception through Sep 15, 2021. Both prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. The primary outcomes were complete response (defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue medications) and no nausea rate, and the secondary outcome was treatment-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Four studies with 466 breast cancer patients were identified in the pooled analysis. In the acute period (0-24 h), the olanzapine group had significantly higher rates of complete response (71.3% vs 48.1%, odds ratio [OR]: 2.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-5.11, p = 0.003) and no nausea (70.0% vs 43.0%, OR: 3.55, 95% CI 1.76-7.18, p = 0.04) than the placebo group, while in the delayed period, the olanzapine group was also superior to the placebo group in terms of the complete response (82.5% vs 63.3%, OR: 3.81, 95% CI 1.58-9.15, p = 0.003) and no nausea (66.3% vs 51.9%, OR: 2.08, 95% CI 1.03-4.21, p = 0.04) rates. During the overall period in prospective studies, the proportions of complete response (50.0% vs 34.2%, OR: 1.93, p = 0.04) and no nausea (51.3% vs 25.3%, OR: 3.40, p = 0.0006) in the olanzapine group were higher than those in the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy breast patients could benefit from olanzapine-contained antiemetic therapy. Furthermore, since the cost is low, olanzapine is worth further clinical application and promotion.

Malus domestica reduces chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is considered as the most common complications of chemotherapy which has a detrimental influence on the quality of life of patients with cancer. We assessed the efficacy of Apple (Malus domestica) syrup for reducing CINV.

Materials and Methods

This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial carried out in a Hematooncology Clinic affiliated to Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran (from October 2017 to August 2018). Subjects were randomly allocated to receive apple syrup or placebo along with their previous antiemetic treatment and chemotherapy regimen, three times a day. Thirty-four patients received apple syrup (n = 16) or placebo (n = 18). Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS software Version 21^® (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). A P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results

Both acute and delayed nausea grades were significantly lower in M. domestica syrup in comparison to placebo syrup (P = 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). The duration of nausea (P = 0.04) was lower in intervention group compared to placebo group.

Conclusion

These findings demonstrated that M. domestica syrup can reduce the severity and duration of nausea in cancer patients who received chemotherapy.

Netupitant/Palonosetron: A Review in Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA; Akynzeo^®), available in oral and intravenous (IV) formulations, is a fixed-dose combination of the neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonist netupitant (or the prodrug, fosnetupitant, in the IV formulation) and the second-generation serotonin 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonist palonosetron. Administered as a single dose, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron (in combination with dexamethasone) is indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adults. In clinical trials, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron plus dexamethasone was associated with high complete response rates (no emesis and no rescue medication) in the acute, delayed and overall phases in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, with efficacy maintained over multiple cycles. Further, oral netupitant/palonosetron was found to be superior to palonosetron and non-inferior to aprepitant plus granisetron in preventing CINV in individual trials. Both the oral and IV formulations of the drug combination are well tolerated. The fixed-dose combination is concordant with guideline recommendations and provides a simple and convenient option for prophylaxis against acute and delayed CINV in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Stability of Aprepitant Injectable Emulsion in Alternate Infusion Bags, in Refrigerated Storage, and Admixed with Dexamethasone and Palonosetron

Purpose

The stability of aprepitant injectable emulsion is evaluated in various admixture bags and solutions, under different storage conditions, and when combined with other antiemetics.

Methods

A volume of 18 mL aprepitant injectable emulsion was added to infusion bags (either non-di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate [DEHP], polyvinyl chloride [PVC]-containing bags or non-DEHP, non-PVC bags) containing 100, 130, or 250 mL of 0.9% normal saline solution (NSS) or 5% dextrose in water (D5W). Bags were stored at controlled room temperature (20–25°C) for up to 12 hours or refrigerated (2–8°C) for up to 72 hours. Compatibility/stability was also assessed in admixtures combined with either dexamethasone or palonosetron. At specified time points, bags were tested for appearance, pH, assay for aprepitant (ie, percent label claim of aprepitant) and aprepitant-related substances, Z-average particle size, globule size distribution, particulate matter, and DEHP content (PVC bags). In separate analyses to assess microbial burden, bags containing aprepitant were inoculated with seven different organisms and assessed for microbial growth.

Results

There was no detectable impact on the physicochemical properties or potential to promote microbial growth of aprepitant when diluted with various amounts of either NSS or D5W and when admixed with either dexamethasone or palonosetron at room temperature for at least 6 hours or during refrigeration for up to 72 hours in either PVC- or non-PVC-containing bags.

Conclusion

Aprepitant-containing admixtures are stable under these conditions, a finding that may improve patient and provider convenience and reduce medication wastage.

Identification of optimal contemporary antiemetic prophylaxis for doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in Chinese cancer patients: post-hoc analysis of 3 prospective studies

OBJECTIVE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common with doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy. Recommended antiemetic regimens incorporate neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA), 5-hydroxytryptamine type-3 receptor antagonist (5HT3RA), corticosteroid, and dopamine antagonists. This post-hoc analysis compared results of 3 prospective antiemetic studies conducted among Chinese breast cancer patients who received (neo)adjuvant AC, in order to identify optimal antiemetic prophylaxis.

METHODS

A total of 304 patients were included: Group 1, ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1); Group 2, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1); Group 3, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1-3); Group 4, aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone (D1-3)/olanzapine; and Group 5, netupitant/palonosetron/dexamethasone (D1-3). Antiemetic efficacies of Groups 3, 4, and 5 during cycle 1 of AC were individually compared with Group 1. In addition, emesis outcomes of patients in Groups 3 and 5, and those of Groups 2 and 3, were compared.

RESULTS

When comparing efficacies of a historical doublet (5HT3RA/dexamethasone) with triplet antiemetic regimens (NK1RA/5HT3RA/dexamethasone) with/without olanzapine, complete response (CR) percentages and quality of life (QOL) in overall phase of cycle 1 AC were compared between Group 1 and the other groups: Group 1 vs. 3, 41.9% vs. 38.3% (P = 0.6849); Group 1 vs. 4, 41.9% vs. 65.0% (P = 0.0107); and Group 1 vs. 5, 41.9% vs. 60.0% (P = 0.0460). Groups 4 and 5 achieved a better QOL. When comparing netupitant-based (Group 3) with aprepitant-based (Group 5) triplet antiemetics, CR percentages were 38.3% vs. 60.0%, respectively (P = 0.0176); Group 5 achieved a better QOL. When comparing 1 day (Group 2) vs. 3 day (Group 3) dexamethasone, CR percentages were 46.8% and 38.3%, respectively (P = 0.3459); Group 3 had a worse QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant-containing triplets were non-superior to doublet antiemetics. Netupitant-containing triplets and adding olanzapine to aprepitant-containing triplets were superior to doublets. Netupitant/palonosetron/dexamethasone was superior to aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone. Protracted administration of dexamethasone provided limited additional benefit.

Severity of constipation related to palonosetron during first-line chemotherapy: a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Palonosetron, a long-acting 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist, is an effective antiemetic agent for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; however, it sometimes causes severe constipation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the severity of palonosetron-related constipation.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the incidence and severity of constipation after intravenous administration of 0.75-mg palonosetron in 150 chemotherapy-naïve patients who received first-line chemotherapy at Saga University Hospital. Constipation was classified into grades 1-5 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with palonosetron-related worsening of constipation to grade 2 or higher.

RESULTS

Palonosetron significantly increased the incidence and severity of constipation (incidence: before vs. after palonosetron, 35.4% vs. 74.0%, p < 0.0001, and severity: before vs. after palonosetron, 26.7% and 8.7% in grades 1 and 2, respectively, vs. 46.7%, 23.3%, and 4.0% in grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively, p < 0.0001). Despite the use of laxatives, 4.0% of patients had grade 3 constipation requiring manual evacuation. Combination treatment with aprepitant (odds ratio (OR), 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-90.0; p = 0.026) and older age (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57; p = 0.039) were factors associated with the severity of constipation.

CONCLUSION

Constipation was more severe in patients receiving combination treatment with aprepitant than in those treated with palonosetron alone. Older age was also associated with increased risk of severe palonosetron-related constipation. Identification of risk factors can help target risk-based laxative therapy.

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.

A phase III study of transdermal granisetron versus oral ondansetron for women with gynecologic cancers receiving pelvic chemoradiation

PURPOSE

To compare rates of complete response (no emesis, retching, or rescue antiemetics) in the late phase (days 4-7 post-chemotherapy) of cycle 1 between transdermal granisetron and oral ondansetron in cervical, endometrial, or vaginal cancer survivors undergoing chemoradiation at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and LBJ Hospital in Houston, TX.

METHODS

In this non-blinded parallel design trial, eligible patients received a granisetron patch replaced every 7 days or 8 mg of ondansetron thrice daily continued for 72 h after chemotherapy completion. Data were collected on medication compliance, episodes of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), use of rescue antiemetics, and effects of CINV on quality of life.

RESULTS

Seventy-five survivors receiving chemoradiation for cervical (n = 61), endometrial (n = 12), or vaginal (n = 2) cancer were electronically randomized to transdermal granisetron (n = 41) or oral ondansetron (n = 34). In the late phase of cycle 1, the rate of complete response was 49.8% (95% CI, 35.2-64.3%) for transdermal granisetron and 39.7% (95% CI, 24.4-56.1%) for oral ondansetron. The posterior probability that transdermal granisetron achieved a higher success rate in controlling late-onset CINV compared with oral ondansetron was 82%. During the acute phase (day 1 post-chemotherapy) of cycles 2 and 3, transdermal granisetron patients used more rescue antiemetics than oral ondansetron patients (p = 0.006 and p = 0.003, respectively). Otherwise, no between-group differences in CINV events were observed. Medication compliance and the effect of CINV on quality of life were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Transdermal granisetron was 82% more like to control CINV than oral ondansetron in the late phase of cycle 1 and performed similarly to oral ondansetron in all other cycles. Transdermal granisetron should be considered an option as prophylactic antiemetic therapy for gynecologic cancer survivors undergoing chemoradiation.

Quality by Design (QbD)-Based Numerical and Graphical Optimization Technique for the Development of Osmotic Pump Controlled-Release Metoclopramide HCl Tablets

PURPOSE

To develop the osmotically controlled-release gastroprokinetic metoclopramide HCl tablets, using quality by design (QbD)-numerical and graphical optimization technique for the treatment of gastroparesis and prophylaxis of delayed nausea and vomiting induced by low-high emetogenic chemotherapy.

METHODS

Formulations were designed by central composite design using Design Expert version 11.0.0, with osmogen concentration (X1), orifice size (X2), and tablet weight gain after coating (X3) as input and in-vitro drug release at 1hr. (Y1), 6 hrs. (Y2), and 12 hrs. (Y3), and the regression coefficient of drug release data fitted to zero-order, RSQ zero (Y4) as output variables. Core tablets prepared by direct compression were coated with Opadry® CA. The experimental design was validated by the polynomial equation. A correlation between predicted and observed values was evaluated by random checkpoint analysis. The optimized formulations were characterized for drug release, pH effect, osmolarity, agitation intensity, surface morphology, and stability study, and were subjected to accelerated studies according to ICH guidelines.

RESULTS

The interaction charts and response surface plots deduced a significant simultaneous effect of X variables on in vitro drug release and RSQ zero. The numerical optimization model predicted >90% drug release with X1 (13.30%), X2 (0.6 mm), and X3 (7.96%). Random checkpoint analysis showed a good correlation between predicted and observed values. The optimized formulation followed zero-order kinetics (r2=0.9703) drug release. Shelf life calculated was 2.8 years as per ICH guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The QbD-based approach was found successful in developing controlled release osmotic tablets of metoclopramide HCl, for reducing the dosage frequency, better emetic control, and improve patient compliance.

Efficacy of Olanzapine-Triple Antiemetic Regimen in Patients with Gastrointestinal Tumor and High Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

Dexamethasone combined with 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3 RA) dual regimen is the standard prophylaxis regimen for patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). However, it has been found in real-world practice that chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains poorly controlled among patients with gastrointestinal tumor, especially in those with high-risk factors for vomiting, such as female, young, and non-alcoholic individuals. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of an olanzapine-containing triple regimen in this clinical setting.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of gastrointestinal tumor patients who received mFOLFOX6, XELOX, or FOLFIRI chemotherapy at two institutions. All patients included were female and less than 55 years old, with no history of drinking. The patients were divided into two groups for olanzapine-containing triple therapy (olanzapine, tropisetron, and dexamethasone) and non-olanzapine dual therapy (tropisetron and dexamethasone). The study outcomes were complete response (CR), complete control (CC), nausea control, and quality of life (QoL) by the functional living index-emesis (FLIE) questionnaire.

Results

A total of 93 patients were included in the study (olanzapine: 40; control: 53). The CR rate in the olanzapine group was significantly higher than that in the control group in delayed and overall phase (75.0% vs 54.7%, p=0.044; 70.0% vs 47.2%; p=0.028). The CC rate in the overall phase was also better in the olanzapine group (62.5% vs 39.6%, p=0.029). The control of nausea in the overall phase showed a superior trend in the olanzapine group (p=0.059). The olanzapine group exhibited higher FLIE scores, which demonstrated better QoL. More patients in the olanzapine group exhibited somnolence and dizziness. Conversely, the incidence of insomnia and anorexia in the olanzapine group was lower.

Conclusion

This retrospective study indicates that in gastrointestinal tumor patients with high-risk factors for CINV who were receiving MEC, olanzapine-containing triple antiemetic regimen exhibit better efficacy and QoL as compared to non-olanzapine dual regimen. Further randomized studies are required to confirm these results.

Unscheduled hydrations: redefining complete response in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting studies

Breakthrough chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is nausea and/or vomiting occurring within 5 days of chemotherapy administration despite using guideline-directed prophylactic antiemetic agents. It is highly prevalent (30–40%), usually requiring immediate treatment or “rescue” medication. If breakthrough CINV occurs, antiemetic guidelines recommend using an antiemetic agent from a different class not used in prophylaxis, along with intravenous hydration and/or dexamethasone. Data supporting these guideline recommendations are limited. Importantly, costs associated with breakthrough CINV can be substantial (i.e., unscheduled hydrations). Two retrospective analyses evaluating guideline-adherent CINV prophylaxis suggest that the initial antiemetic selection may decrease breakthrough CINV. Here we review optimal CINV prophylactic strategies and introduce unscheduled hydration as a potential important surrogate for breakthrough CINV aligning with cost-effective cancer care.

Best Practice Approach to Successful Conversion of Fosaprepitant to Aprepitant IV in a Large Multisite Community Oncology Infusion Center: A Retrospective Analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the impact on cost, time, resource use, and clinic workflow of converting the route of drug administration from a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK-1 RA) 30-min intravenous (IV) infusion to aprepitant IV, and more specifically to IV push, within a multicenter community oncology practice.

Methods

This was a retrospective, multicenter time, motion, and resource/cost evaluation study. Conversion to aprepitant IV was determined by calculating number of doses of aprepitant IV versus fosaprepitant administered in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. Operational advantages (i.e., supply costs, time saved) of switching from fosaprepitant IV infusion to aprepitant administered as a 2-min IV push were assessed.

Results

A total of 12,908 doses of aprepitant IV 130 mg were administered at 13 Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers clinics over an 18-month period. Conversion from fosaprepitant to aprepitant IV reached 90% after 9 months of aprepitant IV initiation. Supply costs per administration were reduced ($2.51 to $0.52) when aprepitant was prepared as an IV push versus an NK-1 RA infusion. The overall time savings per administration of aprepitant was reduced by 90% (from 36.5 to 3.5 min, 33 min saved) as an IV push rather than an infusion. Most of the time saved per administration (30 min) pertained to the infusion nurse, and 3 min was saved by the pharmacy technician.

Conclusion

Successful conversion to aprepitant, and specifically to a 2-min IV push, provides time, cost, and resource savings, improves operational efficiency, and avoids the negative impact of potential future IV fluid shortages.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can have a major impact on quality of life for patients receiving chemotherapy. Intravenous (IV) aprepitant is an approved neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK-1 RA) that has been effective and safe when administered as part of a guideline-recommended regimen in patients receiving chemotherapy. In addition to being approved as a 30-min infusion, aprepitant IV is the only NK-1 RA approved for administration as a 2-min injection. These factors contributed to Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers (RMCC), which is a physician-owned community oncology practice, evaluating the impact on cost, time, and resource use of converting from a 30-min infusion of fosaprepitant to aprepitant IV, and more specifically a 2-min injection. Within 9 months of implementing aprepitant IV at RMCC, the percent utilization compared to fosaprepitant reached over 90%, signifying a successful conversion within the practice. Furthermore, a 2-min injection of aprepitant IV resulted in several operational advantages compared to a 30-min infusion. When accounting for all 13 clinics within RMCC, total monthly time savings to the practice would be over 28,000 min, or approximately 60 workdays per month of saved time. This new workflow is more efficient and allows for pharmacy technicians to complete other necessary tasks in the pharmacy such as cleaning, organizing, managing inventory, drug ordering, and charge/documentation corrections. Time saved by the nurses could be used for enhanced patient care, thoroughly reviewing chemotherapy or other orders, and assisting other nurses.

Cost-effectiveness of newer regimens for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: review of the literature and real-world data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To investigate the cost of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adults receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) for cancer treatment in real life.

RECENT FINDINGS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutives patients with advanced lung cancer treated in platinum-based (carboplatin or cisplatin) chemotherapy and with breast cancer treated with anthracycline and cyclophosphamide -based chemotherapy at our Medical Oncology Unit during 4 years was performed. The costs of drugs are at the Pharmacy of our Hospital (&OV0556;).

SUMMARY

We evaluated 110 patients with lung cancer and 55 patients with breast cancer. Concerning lung cancer, we have obtained an advantage of 133 &OV0556; in monthly medical costs of NEPA and dexamethasone (DEX) vs. the combination of palonosetron (PALO) and DEX for each patient. Concerning breast cancer, we have obtained an advantage of 78 &OV0556; in monthly medical costs of NEPA and DEX vs. the combination of PALO and DEX for each patient. Combining the medical costs of antiemetic therapy with the measure of efficacy represented by the complete response, the combination of NEPA and DEX is cost-effective for preventing CINV in HEC and MEC cancer treatment.

What the HEC? Clinician Adherence to Evidence-Based Antiemetic Prophylaxis for Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Background: Clinician adherence to antiemetic guidelines for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) caused by highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) remains poorly characterized. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate individual clinician adherence to HEC antiemetic guidelines. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients receiving HEC was conducted using the IBM Watson Explorys Electronic Health Record Database (2012–2018). HEC antiemetic guideline adherence was defined as prescription of triple prophylaxis (neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist [NK1 RA], serotonin type-3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone) at initiation of cisplatin or anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC). Clinicians who prescribed ≥5 HEC courses were included and individual guideline adherence was assessed, noting the number of prescribing clinicians with >90% adherence. Results: A total of 217 clinicians were identified who prescribed 2,543 cisplatin and 1,490 AC courses. Patients (N=4,033) were primarily women (63.3%) and chemotherapy-naïve (92%) with a mean age of 58.6 years. Breast (36%) and thoracic (19%) cancers were the most common tumor types. Guideline adherence rates of >90% were achieved by 35% and 58% of clinicians using cisplatin or AC, respectively. Omission of an NK1 RA was the most common practice of nonadherence. Variation in prophylaxis guideline adherence was considerable for cisplatin (mean, 71%; SD, 29%; coefficient of variation [CV], 0.40) and AC (mean, 84%; SD, 26%; CV, 0.31). Conclusions: Findings showed substantial gaps in clinician adherence to HEC CINV guidelines, including a high variability across clinicians. Clinicians should review their individual clinical practices and ensure adherence to evidence-based CINV guidelines to optimize patient care.

Pharmacogenetics of antiemetics for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A substantial proportion of cancer patients experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) despite the use of antiemetic drugs. Prevalent genetic polymorphisms involved in antiemetic drug metabolism, drug transport and receptor pathways likely affect the effectiveness of antiemetics. Knowledge on which polymorphisms to integrate into individualised clinical care is needed. We did a systematic review evaluating the association between polymorphisms and effectiveness of antiemetics in cancer patients receiving moderately to highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Twenty studies n = 2331 evaluated eight polymorphisms in five candidate genes involved in 5-HT₃ antagonist pathways. HTR3C C1214G increased the risk of acute chemotherapy-induced vomiting in the dominant model (odds ratio (OR) = 2.67, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.08-6.63). ABCB1 C3435T reduced the risk of acute CINV in the recessive model (OR = 0.60, 95 % CI: 0.44-0.81). Future studies should evaluate candidate genes that affect pharmacogenetics of other antiemetics beside 5-HT₃ antagonists.

Performance Measures Based on How Adults With Cancer Feel and Function: Stakeholder Recommendations and Feasibility Testing in Six Cancer Centers

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess how patients feel and function have potential for evaluating quality of care. Stakeholder recommendations for PRO-based performance measures (PMs) were elicited, and feasibility testing was conducted at six cancer centers.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with 124 stakeholders to determine priority symptoms and risk adjustment variables for PRO-PMs and perceived acceptability. Stakeholders included patients and advocates, caregivers, clinicians, administrators, and thought leaders. Feasibility testing was conducted in six cancer centers. Patients completed PROMs at home 5-15 days into a chemotherapy cycle. Feasibility was operationalized as ≥ 75% completed PROMs and ≥ 75% patient acceptability.

RESULTS

Stakeholder priority PRO-PMs for systemic therapy were GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting), depression/anxiety, pain, insomnia, fatigue, dyspnea, physical function, and neuropathy. Recommended risk adjusters included demographics, insurance type, cancer type, comorbidities, emetic risk, and difficulty paying bills. In feasibility testing, 653 patients enrolled (approximately 110 per site), and 607 (93%) completed PROMs, which indicated high feasibility for home collection. The majority of patients (470 of 607; 77%) completed PROMs without a reminder call, and 137 (23%) of 607 completed them after a reminder call. Most patients (72%) completed PROMs through web, 17% paper, or 2% interactive voice response (automated call that verbally asked patient questions). For acceptability, > 95% of patients found PROM items to be easy to understand and complete.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders agree that PMs that are based on how patients feel and function would be an important addition to quality measurement. This study also shows that PRO-PMs can be feasibly captured at home during systemic therapy and are acceptable to patients. PRO-PMs may add value to the portfolio of PMs as oncology transitions from fee-for-service payment models to performance-based care that emphasizes outcome measures.

A randomized study of olanzapine-containing versus standard antiemetic regimens for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Chinese breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVES

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are distressing symptoms. This randomized study evaluated the antiemetic efficacies of standard antiemetic regimen with/without olanzapine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were chemotherapy-naive Chinese breast cancer patients who were planned for (neo)adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide. Antiemetic regimen for all studied population included aprepitant, ondansetron and dexamethasone; patients were randomized to Olanzapine (with olanzapine) or Standard arms (without olanzapine). Patients filled in self-reported diaries and completed visual analogue scales for nausea, as well as Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaires. Blood profiles including fasting glucose and lipids were monitored.

RESULTS

120 patients were randomized. In Cycle 1 doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, the Olanzapine arm had significantly higher rates of "Complete Response" than the Standard arm: 65.0% vs 38.3% in the overall period (p = 0.0035), 70.0% vs 51.7% in the acute period (p = 0.0397) and 92.9% vs 74.2% in the delayed period (p = 0.0254). Olanzapine arm also had significantly higher rates of "No significant nausea" and "No nausea" during all 3 time-frames and better QOL. Similar findings were also revealed throughout multiple cycles. Pre-study abnormalities in glucose and lipids occurred in 39.7% and 34.2% of the studied population respectively; there were no differences in these parameters between the two arms at end-of-study assessment.

CONCLUSION

The addition of olanzapine to standard aprepitant-based antiemetic regimen provides clinically meaningful improvement in controlling CINV. This was associated with a positive impact on QOL and tolerable toxicity profiles among Chinese breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy. Further studies on metabolic profiles of breast cancer patients are warranted.

Safety Profile of HTX-019 Administered as an Intravenous Infusion in Patients With Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

HTX-019 is a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist approved for prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. When administered as a 30-minute intravenous (IV) infusion, HTX-019 has displayed a tolerable and favorable safety profile in healthy subjects. This is the first study to evaluate the safety profile of multiple HTX-019 infusions in patients with cancer. This retrospective analysis shows that HTX-019 administered via IV infusion has a favorable safety profile in patients with cancer, and no new treatment-emergent adverse events were identified.

Competing Morbidities In Advanced Head And Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy: A Strong Implication Of A Multidisciplinary Team Approach

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the standard approach for the treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Despite its undisputed advantages, CCRT is associated with acute and late toxicities, leading to unfavorable implications (eg, unplanned interruptions and noncancer-related mortality). The former prolongs the overall treatment time leading to a detrimental effect on tumor control. The latter consists of several noncancer morbidities arising from treatment-related toxicities, identifying a new pathway in cancer fate. This pathway has been termed noncancer mortality or competing mortality and consists of a series of treatment-competing morbidities, which nullify all therapeutic efforts aimed at curing these patients. The management of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who experience treatment-related toxicities is complex and requires expertise in oncological treatment as well as supportive care. The optimal management of these patients should start with knowledge regarding the most important competing morbidities developing during all phases of the disease (ie, from diagnosis to follow-up) to minimize treatment interruptions, ensure appropriate psychological support, and achieve the best oncological result. The purpose of the present review is to analyze the most important competing morbidities due to patient’s condition at baseline and CCRT, which could result in noncancer mortality. A multidisciplinary team approach is strongly required in the management of this disease.

Δ9-THC and related cannabinoids suppress substance P- induced neurokinin NK1-receptor-mediated vomiting via activation of cannabinoid CB1 receptor

Δ⁹-THC suppresses cisplatin-induced vomiting through activation of cannabinoid CB₁ receptors. Cisplatin-evoked emesis is predominantly due to release of serotonin and substance P (SP) in the gut and the brainstem which subsequently stimulate their corresponding 5-HT₃-and neurokinin NK₁-receptors to induce vomiting. Δ⁹-THC can inhibit vomiting caused either by the serotonin precursor 5-HTP, or the 5-HT₃ receptor selective agonist, 2-methyserotonin. In the current study, we explored whether Δ⁹-THC and related CB₁/CB₂ receptor agonists (WIN55,212-2 and CP55,940) inhibit vomiting evoked by SP (50 mg/kg, i.p.) or the NK₁ receptor selective agonist GR73632 (5 mg/kg, i.p.). Behavioral methods were employed to determine the antiemetic efficacy of cannabinoids in least shrews. Our results showed that administration of varying doses of Δ⁹-THC (i.p. or s.c.), WIN55,212-2 (i.p.), or CP55,940 (i.p.) caused significant suppression of SP-evoked vomiting in a dose-dependent manner. When tested against GR73632, Δ⁹-THC also dose-dependently reduced the evoked emesis. The antiemetic effect of Δ⁹-THC against SP-induced vomiting was prevented by low non-emetic doses of the CB₁ receptor inverse-agonist/antagonist SR141716A (<10 mg/kg). We also found that the NK₁ receptor antagonist netupitant can significantly suppress vomiting caused by a large emetic dose of SR141716A (20 mg/kg). In sum, Δ⁹-THC and related cannabinoids suppress vomiting evoked by the nonselective (SP) and selective (GR73632) neurokinin NK₁ receptor agonists via stimulation of cannabinoid CB₁ receptors.

Safety profile of HTX-019 administered as an intravenous push in cancer patients: a retrospective review

Objectives: HTX-019 (Cinvanti®) is a novel injectable emulsion formulation of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist (RA) aprepitant, approved (as 30-min infusion and 2-min injection) for preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This retrospective analysis evaluated the safety of HTX-019 administered by 2-min injection in patients with cancer.Methods: At a single center, HTX-019 was evaluated as a 2-min injection within a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen for CINV prophylaxis in patients receiving highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed 0-60 minutes following initiation of HTX-019 administration, focusing on infusion-site adverse events and hypersensitivity reactions.Results: Among 600 patients (78 MEC, 522 HEC), the most common diagnoses were lung (172) and breast (129) cancer. Patients received a 2-min injection of HTX-019, followed by a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 RA intravenously (IV) (palonosetron or ondansetron), dexamethasone IV, and chemotherapy regimen (most common was cisplatin-containing) via a central (76%) and peripheral line (24%). No TEAEs occurred within 60 min after start of HTX-019 administration.Conclusion: HTX-019 administered by 2-min injection has a tolerable safety profile in patients with cancer, representing a viable method of HTX-019 administration for CINV prevention.

The safety of rolapitant for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy

Introduction: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a significant clinical issue that affects patients' quality of life as well as treatment decisions. Significant improvements in the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting have occurred in the past 15 years with the introduction of new antiemetic agents 5-HT3, receptor antagonists, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and olanzapine. Oral (aprepitant, 2003; netupitant, 2014; rolapitant, 2015) neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists have been developed along with intravenous formulations (fosaprepitant, NEPA, rolapitant, HTX-019) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.Areas covered: This review presents a description of the safety and efficacy of rolapitant along with a comparison to the other oral and intravenous formulations of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists.Expert opinion: Oral rolapitant has been demonstrated in clinical trials to be safe and effective in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Rolapitant has a longer half-life (180 h) than other commercially available NK-1 receptor antagonists and does not induce or inhibit CYP34A, unlike the other NK-1 receptor antagonists. Future studies may determine if these may be important clinical issues.

Dexamethasone Reduces Postoperative Nausea in Pediatric Upper Endoscopy With Deep Sedation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the effect of a single dose of preoperative dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), a frequent complication and a major cause of delayed recovery in pediatric upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) under sedation.

METHODS

In this double-blind randomized controlled study, 98 children aged 2 to 14, with American Society of Anesthesiologists status I to II, and undergoing elective UGIE with deep sedation were included and randomly assigned to 2 groups. Preoperatively, after anesthesia induction with sodium thiopental and maintenance with sevoflurane, patients in the intervention (n = 49) and control (n = 49) groups, respectively received 0.1 mg/kg i.v. dexamethasone and 2 cm i.v. 0.9% saline. Postoperatively, PONV incidence was measured as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

PONV incidence was significantly less in dexamethasone group (8.2%) compared to the control group (26.5%) (difference = 18.3%, 95% confidence interval: 3.4%-33%, P = 0.016). For secondary outcomes, between-group differences were not statistically significant: incidence of bronchospasm or laryngospasm (both 4.1%, P = 1); emergence delirium assessed with Pediatric Anesthesia Emergence Delirium scale (5.9 ± 3.4 vs 5.7 ± 3.2, P = 0.751); Modified Aldrete score at 0 minutes (9.4 ± 0.8 vs 9.3 ± 0.9, P = 0.909) and at 5 minutes (9.5 ± 0.7 vs 9.4 ± 0.9, P = 0.527); and recovery time (21.1 ± 6.6 vs 23.4 ± 8.6 minutes, P = 0.130).

CONCLUSIONS

A single preoperative dose of i.v. dexamethasone reduces PONV in children undergoing elective UGIE with deep sedation, but has no significant effect on the patient recovery time or the incidence of postoperative bronchospasm or laryngospasm and emergence delirium.

Netupitant plus palonosetron is a cost-effective treatment for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in highly and moderately emetogenic cancer treatment

Introduction: The analysis was conducted to assess a cost-efficacy analysis of new antiemetic drugs (netupitant plus palonosetron (NEPA)) for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy for cancer treatment. Areas covered:The present evaluation was restricted to pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of NEPA versus (vs.) palonosetron for the prophylaxis of CINV. We calculated the pharmacological costs necessary to get the benefit in complete response (CR), for each trial. Our analysis evaluated 2 RCTs, including 1720 patients. Referring to both highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, NEPA plus DEX was economic superior to palonosetron (PALO) plus DEX, with 13 312 € and 7885 € gain in medical costs every 100 patients treated, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) (€/CR) in highly emetoge nic risk were 1.24 and 13.23 for the NEPA and PALO group, respectively and 1.49 and 15.20 for the same groups in moderately emetogenic risk. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the groups was 1016.18 €/CR and 1024.03 €/CR in highly and moderately emetogenic risk, respectively. Expert opinion:The combination of NEPA plus DEX is cost-effective for preventing CINV in highly and moderately (AC-based) emetogenic cancer treatment.