Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine in Children Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Randomized, Double-blind Placebo-controlled Phase 3 Trial

Trial Sequential Analysis and Meta-Analysis of Olanzapine in Pediatric Patients for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV)

Background and Objective: Olanzapine (OLZ) containing regimens are approved in adults for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), and the same has not been approved in the pediatric population. In order to generate data regarding the efficacy and safety of OLZ as an adjunct to the standard of care (SoC) for CINV in pediatric patients receiving HEC/MEC, the review authors performed this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed through the databases Cochrane Library, Pub Med, and clinicaltrials.gov, from inception to September 2023, using keywords: "chemotherapy" and "olanzapine," "nausea" and "vomiting." Randomized clinical trials published in English that analyzed the efficacy and safety of olanzapine as an adjunct to SoC were included. The essential outcomes included in this study were the proportion of patients with no emesis in the acute and delayed phase, patients with no nausea in the acute and delayed phase, the proportion of patients requiring rescue medication, and the proportion of patients with reduced CNS arousal. Results: In the OLZ group, a greater number of patients had no emesis both in the acute and delayed phase (RR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.09-1.37; P = .0004); and (RR = 1.23; 95% CI = 0.92-1.63; P = .16) respectively. Similarly, a higher number of patients showed no nausea both in the acute and delayed phase (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.78-1.48; P = .66) and (RR = 1.12; 95% CI = 0.79-1.61; P = .52) respectively. The use of rescue medication was significantly less in the OLZ group (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.42-0.91; P = .01). More patients experienced reduced CNS arousal in the OLZ group (RR = 2.97; 95% CI = 2.02-4.38; P < .0001). Conclusions: Olanzapine as an adjunct to the SoC may be effective in acute emesis, which may also reduce the use of rescue medication. Reduced CNS alertness was the significant adverse effect observed. For other endpoints, more studies are required to substantiate its role in CINV.

Olanzapine cost-effectiveness in vomiting and nausea from highly emetogenic chemotherapy in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of addition of olanzapine to a prophylactic antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant, dexamethasone and ondansetron among children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA.

METHODS

Health states were estimated using individual patient-level outcome data from a randomised trial. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit (NMB) were calculated from the patient perspective for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA. One-way sensitivity analysis was done by varying the cost of olanzapine, cost of hospitalisation and utility values by ±25%.

RESULTS

The olanzapine arm had an increment of 0.0018 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) over the control arm. The mean total expenditure in the olanzapine arm was greater by US$0.51, US$0.43, US$6.73, US$11.05 and US$12.35 in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR($/QALY) was US$282.60 in India, US$241.42 in Bangladesh, US$3755.93 in Indonesia, US$6161.83 in the UK and US$6887.41 in the USA. The NMB was US$9.86, US$10.12, US$14.08, US$44.74 and US$98.79 for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR estimates of the base case and sensitivity analysis were below the willingness-to-pay threshold in all scenarios.

CONCLUSION

The addition of olanzapine as a fourth agent for antiemetic prophylaxis is cost-effective despite an increase in overall expenditure. Olanzapine should be uniformly considered for children receiving HEC.

Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remain the most distressing event in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of olanzapine containing regimen in preventing CINV in children on HEC and MEC. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials electronic databases to identify randomized clinical trials that compared 2 groups who either got olanzapine (olanzapine group) or placebo/no olanzapine (control group) for the prevention of CINV in children. The primary outcome was to determine the efficacy of olanzapine (complete response). The secondary outcomes were nausea control, the need for rescue medications, and adverse events of olanzapine. Three randomized clinical trials (n=394 patients) were included in this meta-analysis (olanzapine group, n=194, and placebo/control group, n=200). The pooled analysis of this meta-analysis found that olanzapine had a higher complete response in all phases of emesis in the HEC group and only in the acute phase in HEC/MEC groups compared with the control group. Olanzapine had higher nausea control in all phases of HEC but no nausea control in HEC/MEC. Olanzapine also reduced the need for rescue medications. A significant number of patients in the olanzapine group experienced somnolence (grades 1 and 2), but none of the participants discontinued the study due to side effects. In conclusion, this meta-analysis showed that olanzapine significantly prevented CINV in HEC. There was also a lesser need for rescue medications in the olanzapine group. Somnolence was higher in the olanzapine group, but it was clinically insignificant.