Cisplatin given at three divided doses for three consecutive days in metastatic breast cancer: an alternative schedule for one full dose with comparable efficacy but less CINV and hypomagnesaemia

Two doses of fosaprepitant included prophylactic treatment for the three-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting

PURPOSE

Neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists included prophylactic treatment was recommended for patients who receive one-day cisplatin chemotherapy. It is unclear whether the prolonged administration of fosaprepitant is effective for three-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). We aim to explore the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy and safety of two doses of fosaprepitant included regimen in the patients receiving multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy.

METHODS

This randomized, parallel-group, open-labelled study was conducted in nine hospitals between February 2021 and February 2023. Patients diagnosed as lung cancer and chemotherapy naive were screened. Eligible participants were scheduled to be treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimen which including three days of cisplatin. Then they were randomly divided into the experimental group (two doses of fosaprepitant, Group 2DF) and the control group (one dose of fosaprepitant, Group C). The primary endpoints included the safety and the average none CINV days (NCDs). This study was registered on the website of chictr.org.cn, number ChiCTR2100042665.

RESULTS

Overall, 204 participants were randomly assigned, and 198 patients were analyzed. No statistical difference in adverse events was found between the two groups. All treatment-related adverse effects for fosaprepitant observed were of grade 1-2. The average NCDs of Group 2DF was significantly more than Group C (18.21 ± 3.40 days vs 16.14 ± 5.20 days, P = 0.001). Furthermore, the better life function score was achieved in Group 2DF according to FLIE questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

The administration of two-dose fosaprepitant was safe and more effective than one dose in protecting patients from CINV induced by three-day cisplatin included chemotherapy.

Advancing perspectives on the off-label use of anticancer drugs: an updated classification and exploration of categories

To date, the definition that the off-label usage of drugs refers to the unapproved use of approved drugs, which covers unapproved indications, patient populations, doses, and/or routes of administration, has been in existence for many years. Currently, there is a limited frequency and prevalence of research on the off-label use of antineoplastic drugs, mainly due to incomplete definition and classification issues. It is time to embrace new categories for the off-label usage of anticancer drugs. This review provided an insight into an updated overview of the concept and categories of the off-label use of anticancer drugs, along with illustrating specific examples to establish the next studies about the extent of the off-label usage of anticancer drugs in the oncology setting. The scope of the off-label use of current anticancer drugs beyond the previous definitions not only includes off-label uses in terms of indications, patient populations, doses, and/or routes of administration but also off-label use in terms of medication course, combination, sequence of medication, clinical purpose, contraindications scenarios, etc. In addition, the definition of the off-label usage of anticancer drugs should be added to the condition at a given time, and it varies from approval authorities. We presented a new and relatively comprehensive classification, providing extensive analysis and illustrative examples of the off-label usage of antineoplastic drugs for the first time. Such a classification has the potential to promote practical adoption and enhance management strategies for the off-label use of antitumor drugs.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of olanzapine plus triple antiemetic regimen for the prevention of multiday highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (OFFER study)

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports prophylactic use of olanzapine for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, most studies to date have focused on patients with single-day highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Currently, administration of antiemetic therapies for nausea and vomiting induced by multiday chemotherapy regimens remains a challenge. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of olanzapine combined with triple antiemetic therapy for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving multiday chemotherapy.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial in 22 hospitals. Eligible patients were between 18 and 75 years old, were diagnosed with malignant solid tumors, and they had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2. All the study participants were scheduled to be treated with chemotherapy regimens containing 3-day cisplatin (3-day total dose ≥75 mg/m²). Randomization was computer generated and stratified by gender and chemotherapy treatment history. Allocation was done via an interactive web response system. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either 5 mg olanzapine or placebo orally before bedtime for 5 days combined with intravenous fosaprepitant (150 mg) 1 h before the administration of cisplatin on day 1, ondansetron hydrochloride intravenously, and dexamethasone orally 30 min before cisplatin from days 1 to 3. Dexamethasone was also administered at the same time on days 4 and 5. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with complete response (no vomiting and no rescue therapy) within the overall phase (days 1-8) after starting chemotherapy. Baseline plasma concentrations of P-substance and 5-HT were measured for exploratory analysis. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04536558.

FINDINGS

Between December 2020 and September 2021, 349 patients with malignant solid tumors were enrolled in the study, with 175 participants randomly assigned to receive olanzapine and 174 participants assigned to receive placebo. The proportion of patients who achieved a complete response in the overall phase was significantly higher in the olanzapine group than in the placebo group (69% vs. 58%, P = 0.031). A complete response benefit was observed in the olanzapine group versus the placebo group in almost all the subgroups. Four factors were considered significantly associated with complete response in multivariable analysis: treatment group, gender, baseline plasma concentration of 5-HT, and prior radiotherapy. All the reported adverse events associated with olanzapine administration were grades 1 and 2.

INTERPRETATION

Olanzapine (5 mg) combined with fosaprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone was better than triple antiemetic therapy alone for patients receiving multiday chemotherapy regimens. Based on these results, the four-drug combination should be recommended as the best antiemetic regimen given to patients receiving multiday cisplatin-based chemotherapy and baseline plasma concentration of 5-HT may be used to identify individuals who are prone to CINV. However, all these findings need to be further validated in future studies.

FUNDING

Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. provided research grant and study drugs for this investigator-initiated study.

CACA Guidelines for Holistic Integrative Management of Breast Cancer

Purpose

Breast cancer is now the most common malignant tumor worldwide. About one-fourth of female cancer patients all over the world suffer from breast cancer. And about one in six female cancer deaths worldwide is caused by breast cancer. In terms of absolute numbers of cases and deaths, China ranks first in the world. The CACA Guidelines for Holistic Integrative Management of Breast Cancer were edited to help improve the diagnosis and comprehensive treatment in China.

Methods

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to classify evidence and consensus.

Results

The CACA Guidelines for Holistic Integrative Management of Breast Cancer include the epidemiology of breast cancer, breast cancer screening, breast cancer diagnosis, early breast cancer treatment, advanced breast cancer treatment, follow-up, rehabilitation, and traditional Chinese medicine treatment of breast cancer patients.

Conclusion

We to standardize the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in China through the formulation of the CACA Guidelines.

Effective targeting of breast cancer stem cells by combined inhibition of Sam68 and Rad51

Breast cancer (BC) is the second cause of cancer-related deceases in the worldwide female population. Despite the successful treatment advances, 25% of BC develops resistance to current therapeutic regimens, thereby remaining a major hurdle for patient management. Current therapies, targeting the molecular events underpinning the adaptive resistance, still require effort to improve BC treatment. Using BC sphere cells (BCSphCs) as a model, here we showed that BC stem-like cells express high levels of Myc, which requires the presence of the multifunctional DNA/RNA binding protein Sam68 for the DNA-damage repair. Analysis of a cohort of BC patients displayed that Sam68 is an independent negative factor correlated with the progression of the disease. Genetic inhibition of Sam68 caused a defect in PARP-induced PAR chain synthesis upon DNA-damaging insults, resulting in cell death of TNBC cells. In contrast, BC stem-like cells were able to survive due to an upregulation of Rad51. Importantly, the inhibition of Rad51 showed synthetic lethal effect with the silencing of Sam68, hampering the cell viability of patient-derived BCSphCs and stabilizing the growth of tumor xenografts, including those TNBC carrying BRCA mutation. Moreover, the analysis of Myc, Sam68 and Rad51 expression demarcated a signature of a poor outcome in a large cohort of BC patients. Thus, our findings suggest the importance of targeting Sam68-PARP1 axis and Rad51 as potential therapeutic candidates to counteract the expansion of BC cells with an aggressive phenotype.