Efficacy of intravenous granisetron to control nausea and vomiting during multiple cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy

Clinical Predictors of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide

Background:

Patients with breast cancer often receive emetogenic anthracycline–based chemotherapy as part of their treatment. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) has been commonly reported as one of the distressing adverse effects among patients with cancer. Despite the advent of newer antiemetics and better understanding of the CINV pathophysiology, total eradication of CINV has yet to be achieved.

Objective:

To assess the incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients who have breast cancer and are receiving adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) bolus chemotherapy, ascertain patients’ risk factors affecting CINV response, and study patient adherence to delayed antiemetics.

Methods:

This was a single-institution, prospective, observational study conducted at an outpatient cancer center in Singapore from December 2006 to December 2007. Clinical events such as CINV were collated using a standardized diary. Use of rescue antiemetics and unscheduled clinic visits due to CINV were documented.

Results:

Of a total of 108 participants, 16 patients were lost to follow-up and 1 provided incomplete information; thus, 91 patients were included in the analysis. Delayed antiemetics were given according to the institution's guideline and only 9 (9.9%) patients received aprepitant. Neither acute nor delayed vomiting was reported by a majority of patients and only 4 (4.4%) experienced grade 3 vomiting. The incidence of severe nausea was highest on day 3 of chemotherapy and affected 14.3% of patients. Anxiety and history of chemotherapy-induced nausea were associated with both acute and delayed nausea, and history of motion sickness was associated with delayed vomiting. Approximately 65% of patients were adherent to their prescribed delayed antiemetics.

Conclusions:

Most of our patients adhered to their antiemetics and tolerated AC chemotherapy reasonably well, without vomiting; yet nausea persisted. To improve CINV control, clinicians must actively communicate with patients to facilitate accurate assessment of risk factors and CINV response and to encourage adherence to delayed antiemetics.

Red chili induces rectal hypersensitivity in healthy humans: possible role of 5HT-3 receptors on capsaicin-sensitive visceral nociceptive pathways

BACKGROUND

Red chili has been reported to modulate visceral hypersensitivity, probably by the action of its active ingredient, capsaicin. The role of 5HT-3 receptors on capsaicin-sensitive visceral nociceptive pathways is unknown.

AIM

To test the hypothesis that capsaicin-containing red chili induces rectal hypersensitivity in healthy humans and 5HT-3 receptors participate in this effect.

METHODS

Eighteen healthy volunteers, each underwent three rectal barostat studies under three conditions: (i) oral placebo; (ii) oral chili (5 g daily x 3 days); and (iii) oral chili with 1-mg intravenous (i.v.) granisetron, in randomized, double-blinded, cross-over fashions. Rectal sensation was evaluated by using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Chili ingestion significantly decreased rectal threshold for first, moderate and severe urgency (18 +/- 0.9, 24 +/- 1.2, and 38 +/- 1.5 mmHg, respectively) compared with placebo (22 +/- 0.9, 31 +/- 1.3, and 45 +/- 1.4 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.01). The threshold for first, moderate and severe urgency after chili with i.v. granisetron was 20 +/- 0.9, 28 +/- 1.2 and 44 +/- 1.3 mmHg, respectively. This is a significant increase compared with chili ingestion without granisetron (P < 0.05). After placebo ingestion, i.v. granisetron produced no effect on rectal sensation compared with i.v. placebo in 10 healthy volunteers (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose granisetron, a 5HT-3 receptor antagonist, partially reversed chili-induced rectal hypersensitivity but had no effect on rectal perception induced only by mechanical balloon distention. This study suggests that 5HT-3 receptors may be involved in chili-induced rectal hypersensitivity and potentially participate in the capsaicin-sensitive nociceptive pathways of the human gut.

Management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are symptoms that cause major concern to oncology patients. This article explores the types of nausea and vomiting in the context of chemotherapy, and discusses their pathogenesis and management.

Chemotherapy-induced emesis in elderly cancer patients: the role of 5-HT3-receptor antagonists in the first 24 hours

OBJECTIVE

This review highlights the need to optimize 5-HT3-receptor-antagonist-based antiemetic therapy for elderly cancer patients, particularly during the first 24 h after receiving chemotherapy, based on knowledge of the chemotherapeutic regimen, comorbidity, polypharmacy, dosing convenience and age-related health.

BACKGROUND

The proportion of elderly people (over 65 years of age) in the general population is increasing. Compared with the general population, elderly people have a greater risk of serious diseases, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease. Their chemotherapy can be compromised by factors including comorbidity, declining organ function, polypharmacy, drug-drug interactions and cognitive impairments. The use of aprepitant in this elderly population with many concomitant medications is not discussed. Many chemotherapeutic regimens are highly emetogenic, and nausea and vomiting are rated among the most distressing side effects of chemotherapy. The emetogenic potential of various chemotherapy regimens is reviewed, demonstrating clear differences in severity and time of symptom onset. Such differences are particularly important during the first 24 h after administration, when control of emetic symptoms can help to prevent the occurrence of subsequent episodes. The matter is further complicated by inter-patient differences in susceptibility to nausea and vomiting resulting from multiple factors including gender, age and alcohol intake. Individual patient evaluation is essential to identify those patients most at risk. Elderly patients may also be particularly sensitive to the serious physiological and physical effects of nausea and vomiting. Education about symptom management needs to recognize specific learning barriers in the elderly, such as declining sensory perception or cognitive impairment. 5-HT3-receptor antagonists have long been the gold standard for treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Pharmacological differences between 5-HT3-receptor antagonists suggest the need for careful consideration of individual patient characteristics. Selection of the most appropriate agent will optimize antiemetic therapy for elderly cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy-induced emesis in elderly cancer patients needs optimal control by a 5-HT3-receptor antagonist with uncomplicated 24-hour efficacy and good tolerability. Choosing a 5-HT3-receptor antagonist with a long duration of action, low risk of drug-drug interactions and once-daily dosing is important to ensure effective prophylaxis against nausea and vomiting in the elderly and simplify management for patients with cognitive impairment, declining organ function and comorbidity.

Optimising antiemetic therapy: what are the problems and how can they be overcome?

BACKGROUND

Management of chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-induced emesis has improved significantly following the introduction of the 5-HT3-receptor antagonists. Prophylactic use of these agents is recommended for the prevention of both chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, given with a corticosteroid. Despite these advances, nausea and vomiting remain among the most feared and debilitating adverse effects of cytotoxic therapy. The shift towards a more elderly population of patients with cancer presents additional considerations for supportive care, with an emphasis on achieving control of nausea and vomiting, whilst minimising toxicity and avoiding drug-drug interactions. This review presents some of the key issues for consideration in optimising antiemetic therapy. The PubMed search engine was used to search for relevant literature (up to December 2004) and relevant international congress materials collected during 2003 and 2004.

SCOPE

While the early stages of nausea and vomiting are 5-HT-mediated, identification of a role for substance P in late emesis has led to the development of the NK1-receptor antagonist, aprepitant. As a new agent, the clinical profile of aprepitant is still being explored, including its interaction with concomitant medications. Patients who achieve good control of acute and late-acute nausea and vomiting have a reduced risk of experiencing delayed onset symptoms, emphasising the importance of prophylactic management with effective agents. Although the 5-HT3-receptor antagonists are widely considered to have equivalent efficacy, they vary in half-life and the nature of antagonism at receptors. Their metabolic profiles also differ, with cytochrome P450 (CYP) metabolism affecting their propensity for drug-drug interactions. Several sets of guidelines are available that outline recommendations for selection and use of antiemetic therapy. However, under-use of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists has been reported in both the radiotherapy and chemotherapy settings, and some commonly used doses may be suboptimal.

CONCLUSION

In optimising antiemetic therapy, wider implementation of guidelines is desirable, as is consideration of each patient's individual needs. Safety and tolerability of supportive care medications should be a key consideration, and cardiovascular warnings and the possibility of drug-drug interactions should be given sufficient consideration, particularly in view of the older age of the population with cancer.

Open-label, randomized comparison of the efficacy of intravenous dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron in the prevention of acute and delayed cisplatin-induced emesis in cancer patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare the antiemetic efficacy and tolerability of intravenous dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron in the prevention of acute and delayed emesis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From April 2002 through October 2002, a total of 112 patients receiving cisplatin- based combination chemotherapy were randomized to receive a single i.v. dose of dolasetron 100 mg or ondansetron 8 mg, 30 minutes before the initiation of chemotherapy. In the ondansetron group, two additional doses of ondansetron 8 mg were given at intervals of 2 to 4 hours. To prevent delayed emesis, dolasetron 200 mg p.o. daily or ondansetron 8 mg p.o. bid was administered from the 2(nd) days to a maximum of 5 days. The primary end point was the proportion of patients that experienced no emetic episodes and required no rescue medication (complete response, CR) during the 24 hours (acute period) and during Day 2 to Day 5+/-2 days (delayed period), after chemotherapy. The secondary end points included the incidence and severity of emesis.

RESULTS

105 patients were evaluable for efficacy. CR rates during the acute period were 36.0% for a single dose of dolasetron 100 mg, and 43.6% for three doses of ondansetron 8 mg. CR rates during the delayed period were 8.0% and 10.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the efficacy between the two groups. Adverse effects were mostly mild to moderate and not related to study medication.

CONCLUSIONS

A single i.v. dose of dolasetron 100 mg is as effective as three i.v. doses of ondansetron 8 mg in preventing acute and delayed emesis after cisplatin-based chemotherapy, with a comparable safety profile.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: the importance of acute antiemetic control

Nausea and vomiting are two of the most feared side effects of cancer chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting can be broadly categorized as acute (occurring within 24 hours of therapy), delayed (persisting for 6-7 days after therapy), or anticipatory (occurring prior to chemotherapy administration). Breakthrough and refractory nausea and vomiting describe the symptoms of uncontrolled emesis. Evidence suggests that good control of nausea and vomiting during the acute period correlates with the control of delayed emesis. Conversely, protection failure during the first 24 hours has a high predictive value for delayed emesis in the same cycle. The 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists, regarded as the 'gold standard' in antiemetic therapy, are the first-line treatment for moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy and radiotherapy regimens in adults and children. Evidence suggests that the 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists administered in combination with corticosteroids afford the best protection from symptoms of acute emesis and, by extrapolation, the most effective prevention of delayed emesis. Antiemetic therapeutic guidelines stress that the goal of therapy is to prevent cytostatic-induced nausea and vomiting. Therefore, the prophylactic use of the most effective antiemetic regimen-taking into consideration the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy and individual patient characteristics-must be adhered to in order to prevent acute, delayed, and anticipatory nausea and vomiting.

Effectiveness of serotonin-receptor antagonist antiemetic therapy over successive courses of carboplatin-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

There are extremely limited data available in the general oncology or gynecologic cancer literature to document the effectiveness of antiemetic therapy over multiple courses of cytotoxic chemotherapy.

METHODS

To examine this highly clinically relevant issue, we analyzed the complete treatment course of patients with gynecologic cancers receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy regimens who had participated in one of four institutional serotonin-receptor antagonist antiemetic trials, which had specifically evaluated the benefits of such therapy during only the first treatment course. Medical records were reviewed to examine the development of emesis during subsequent chemotherapy treatment cycles.

RESULTS

The 91 patients included in this analysis received a median of 6 courses (range 1-18) of carboplatin (initial AUC dose 4, 5, and 6 in 29, 29, and 32 patients, respectively). All received ondansetron or granisetron plus dexamethasone with every treatment course. Complete control of emesis (no acute or delayed nausea or vomiting) was experienced by 56 (62%) patients during every cycle. Conversely, 20% of women noted one or more episodes of nausea without vomiting and 19% developed at least one incidence of vomiting. In no case was emesis considered to be severe (grade 3), and no patient required either discontinuation of carboplatin or a dose reduction due to the development of emesis.

CONCLUSION

In the large majority of patients, serotonin-receptor antagonist antiemetic therapy, administered in combination with dexamethasone, is highly effective over multiple courses in preventing significant carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting.