fosaprepitant and Head-and-Neck-Neoplasms

To determine if a lower dose of dexamethasone can be used in combination with fosaprepitant and palonosetron for cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in head and neck cancer patients, we conducted a single-center, two-arm, cross-over comparison study.. Patients were randomly assigned to either standard dose dexamethasone group: intravenous 9.9 mg on day 1 and 6.6 mg on days 2-4 or low-dose dexamethasone group: intravenous 3.3 mg on days 1-4 for the first course and crossed over to the other treatment for the second course. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) in the overall period.. Twenty-five patients were screened for the study and 22 were evaluable. Eleven patients were randomly assigned to the standard dose dexamethasone group and 12 patients to the low-dose dexamethasone group. The CR rate in the overall period was 86% in the standard dose group and 73% in the low-dose group, showing no significant difference (p = .61).. The efficacy of low-dose dexamethasone with fosaprepitant and palonosetron was not inferior to that of the standard dose dexamethasone in the highly emetogenic cisplatin-based treatment for head and neck cancer patients.

Topics: Aged; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Cisplatin; Dexamethasone; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Nausea; Palonosetron; Vomiting

We aimed to compare the preventive effect of 5-day administration of aprepitant with single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine against nausea and vomiting symptoms due to highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens comprising cisplatin (CDDP).. Subjects were inpatients who underwent chemotherapy for gastric cancer, esophageal cancer, lung cancer, or head and neck cancer with a regimen comprising 60 mg/m(2) or higher dose of CDDP. In this randomised, open-label, controlled study, the subjects were assigned to a group given aprepitant for 5 days or a group given a single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine. The nausea and vomiting symptoms that emerged within 7 days after the first CDDP administration were investigated with a questionnaire form; the results were compared between the two groups. Risk factors affecting nausea and vomiting symptoms were also investigated.. Of the 101 patients enrolled, 93 patients were included (48 in the 5-day aprepitant group and 45 in the single fosaprepitant meglumine group). No significant intergroup differences in the complete response rate or the complete control rate were found over the entire period. The nausea score tended to increase from day 3 in both groups, but no significant intergroup difference was observed. Furthermore, the investigation of risk factors affecting moderate or severe nausea symptoms indicated that the fosaprepitant meglumine administration was not a risk factor.. Single administration of fosaprepitant meglumine was not inferior to 5-day administration of aprepitant for preventing acute and delayed nausea and vomiting symptoms occurring after administration of CDDP (60 mg/m(2) or higher).

Topics: Aged; Antiemetics; Aprepitant; Cisplatin; Esophageal Neoplasms; Female; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Meglumine; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Nausea; Risk Factors; Stomach Neoplasms; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome; Vomiting

Concomitant antiemetic therapy comprising fosaprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone is effective for head and neck carcinoma.. A patient diary was constructed to determine the effectiveness of concomitant antiemetic therapy with a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (fosaprepitant), 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonist (palonosetron), and dexamethasone in accordance with guidelines.. Subjects comprised 41 patients who received 71 courses of chemotherapy, along with fosaprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone. A patient diary was compiled concerning the presence/absence of vomiting, vomiting episodes, presence/absence of rescue therapy, food intake, presence/absence of nausea, and general condition.. The frequency of the primary end point of complete response in the overall phase was 69.0%. The proportion of patients with no vomiting in the overall phase was 90.1%. In the acute phase, the proportion of no nausea and slight nausea together was 91.5%, no change in and slightly reduced food intake together was 87.3%, and the proportion of good general condition and relatively good general condition was 85.9%. In the delayed phase, the proportion of no nausea and slight nausea together was 56.3%, no change in and slightly reduced food intake together was 43.7%, and the proportion of good general condition and relatively good general condition together was 53.5%.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma; Cisplatin; Dexamethasone; Drug Therapy, Combination; Eating; Female; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Isoquinolines; Male; Middle Aged; Morpholines; Nausea; Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists; Palonosetron; Quinuclidines; Serotonin Antagonists

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are concerning adverse events resulting from cancer treatment, and current guidelines recommend the use of neurokinin-1-selective antagonists, such as fosaprepitant, in highly emetogenic schemes. However, the implementation of this strategy may be limited by the cost of treatment. GSTP1 c.313A>G genotype was recently described as a predictor of vomiting related to high-dose cisplatin. We hypothesized that the inclusion of routine GSTP1 c.313A>G screening may be promising in financial terms, in contrast to the wide-spread use of fosaprepitant.. A cost-minimization analysis was planned to compare GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping versus overall fosaprepitant implementation for patients with head and neck cancer under chemoradiation therapy with high-dose cisplatin. A decision analytic tree was designed, and conditional probabilities were calculated under Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations using the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. The observed data included patients under treatment without fosaprepitant, while priors were derived from published studies.. To introduce screening with real-time polymerase chain reaction, an initial investment of U$ 39,379.97 would be required, with an amortization cost of U$ 7,272.97 per year. The mean cost of standard therapy with fosaprepitant is U$ 243.24 per patient, and although the initial cost of routine genotyping is higher, there is a tendency of progressive minimization at a threshold of 155 patients (Credible interval-CI: 119 to 216), provided more than one sample is incorporated for simultaneous analysis. A resulting reduction of 35.83% (CI: 30.31 to 41.74%) in fosaprepitant expenditures is then expected with the implementation of GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping.. GSTP1 c.313A>G genotyping may reduce the use of preventive support for chemotherapy induced nausea and lower the overall cost of treatment. Despite the results of this simulation, randomized, interventional studies are required to control for known and unknown confounders as well as unexpected expenses.

Topics: Algorithms; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Bayes Theorem; Chemoradiotherapy; Cisplatin; Computer Simulation; Costs and Cost Analysis; Decision Trees; Drug Costs; Glutathione S-Transferase pi; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Markov Chains; Monte Carlo Method; Morpholines; Nausea; Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction; Vomiting