-
Medicine Oct 2023To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone + palonosetron in the prevention of post-embolization syndrome after drug-eluting beads transcatheter...
To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone + palonosetron in the prevention of post-embolization syndrome after drug-eluting beads transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (D-TACE). The data of 278 patients who received D-TACE from January 2018 to December 2021 were collected and divided into 2 groups: D-TACE group (N = 145) and D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group (N = 133). The incidence of post-embolization syndrome and infection after D-TACE was assessed in both groups. Incidence of abdominal pain: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 56.6% versus 40.6%, P = .008; incidence of fever: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 40.0% versus 14.3%, P = .000; incidence of nausea: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 61.4% versus 39.8%, P = .001; incidence of vomiting: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 48.3% versus 21.1%, P = .000; incidence of infection: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 1.4% versus 1.5%, P = .931. The combined use of dexamethasone and palonosetron before D-TACE can effectively reduce the incidence of post-embolization syndrome and reduce the degree of side effects, but it will not increase the risk of infection.
Topics: Humans; Palonosetron; Antiemetics; Retrospective Studies; Dexamethasone; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic; Vomiting
PubMed: 37800841
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035433 -
Biological & Pharmaceutical Bulletin 2024Although carboplatin (CBDCA) is classified as a moderately emetogenic agent, the majority of guidelines recommend the use of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist in...
Although carboplatin (CBDCA) is classified as a moderately emetogenic agent, the majority of guidelines recommend the use of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist in addition to a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist with dexamethasone (DEX) for CBDCA-containing chemotherapy because of its higher emetogenic risk. However, the additional efficacy of aprepitant (APR) in CBDCA-containing treatment remains controversial, and data on multiple-day treatments are limited. Etoposide (ETP) was administered on days 1-3 in the CBDCA + ETP regimen, and it is important to evaluate suitable antiemetic therapy for the regimen. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of additional APR in CBDCA + ETP. Patients were divided into two groups and retrospectively evaluated. One was the control group, which was prophylactically administered palonosetron (PALO) and DEX, and the other was the APR group, which received APR orally with PALO and DEX. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) between the groups. The overall CR rates were 75.0 and 76.4% in the control and APR groups, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 1.00). In the acute phase, it was 88.9 and 97.2%, respectively, and 86.1 and 79.2% in the delayed phase, respectively, without significant differences (p = 0.10 and 0.38, respectively). The incidence and severity of nausea, vomiting, and anorexia were not significantly different between the two groups in the acute and delayed phases. Our findings suggest that combining APR with PALO and DEX does not improve the CR rate in CBDCA + ETP therapy.
Topics: Aprepitant; Carboplatin; Humans; Dexamethasone; Palonosetron; Male; Etoposide; Antiemetics; Female; Middle Aged; Vomiting; Aged; Nausea; Retrospective Studies; Adult; Drug Therapy, Combination; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Quinuclidines; Morpholines; Antineoplastic Agents; Isoquinolines; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38897969
DOI: 10.1248/bpb.b24-00046 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Dec 2015Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), has unique characteristics relative to first-generation 5-HT3RAs such as... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), has unique characteristics relative to first-generation 5-HT3RAs such as ondansetron. Nevertheless, it remains unclear if palonosetron is better than ondansetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during the first 24 hr after surgery and is thus the focus of this systematic review.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science® databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed a comparison of the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy between palonosetron and ondansetron within 24 hr after surgery. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who experienced postoperative nausea (PON), postoperative vomiting (POV), or both, in the early (0-6 hr) or late (6-24 hr) period. The pooled relative risks (RRs) were calculated along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
We identified nine RCTs that comprised 741 participants. Palonosetron was superior to ondansetron in the reduction of early PON [RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.71], late PON (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.77), and late POV (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.62), but not early POV (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.34).
CONCLUSION
Palonosetron provides more effective prophylaxis of early PON, late PON, and late POV compared with ondansetron. Future studies are required to investigate the role of palonosetron during 24-72 hr following surgery.
Topics: Antiemetics; Humans; Isoquinolines; Ondansetron; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Quinuclidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 26296300
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-015-0457-1 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Nov 2016Palonosetron is a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with proposed higher efficacy and sustained action for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Palonosetron is a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with proposed higher efficacy and sustained action for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials involving adult population undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia comparing palonosetron to placebo, ramosetron, granisetron, and ondansetron were included. Data were extracted for vomiting incidence (VI), complete response (no nausea/vomiting; Complete Response [CR]), and rescue antiemetic need. This was categorized as early phase (24 hours postoperative for ramosetron and 6 hours for rest) and delayed phase (48 hours for ramosetron and 24 hours for rest). VI and CR were used as markers of drug efficacy. Any adverse effects were evaluated.
RESULTS
Twenty-two trials (4 with 3 groups) were included (comparing palonosetron to placebo in 5, ramosetron in 5, granisetron in 4, and ondansetron in 12 subgroups). Palonosetron demonstrated statistical superiority over placebo for VI and CR, both early/delayed PONV prevention. For delayed phase, palonosetron surpassed ramosetron in all 3 variables; however, none of the variables attained statistical significance during early phase. In early phase, palonosetron had better VI and CR than did granisetron; however, variables other than CR (better for palonosetron) failed to achieve statistical significance for delayed phase. All 3 outcomes were significantly better for palonosetron compared with ondansetron in delayed phase, but statistical superiority could only be demonstrated for VI in early phase. Being inconsistently documented across trials, nausea scores could not be evaluated.
CONCLUSION
Palonosetron is as safe as and more effective than placebo, ramosetron, granisetron, and ondansetron in preventing delayed PONV. For early PONV, it has higher efficacy over placebo, granisetron, and ondansetron.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, General; Antiemetics; Benzimidazoles; Granisetron; Humans; Isoquinolines; Ondansetron; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Quinuclidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Serotonin Antagonists; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27687434
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.05.018 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Dec 2014Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is associated with a significant deterioration in quality of life. The emetogenicity of the chemotherapeutic agents,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is associated with a significant deterioration in quality of life. The emetogenicity of the chemotherapeutic agents, repeated chemotherapy cycles, and patient risk factors significantly influence CINV. The introduction of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists has been a major factor in the improvement of the prevention of chemotherapy-induced acute and delayed emesis. Palonosetron , a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with a different half-life, a different binding capacity, and a different mechanism of action than the first-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists appears to be the most effective agent in this drug class.
AREAS COVERED
Palonosetron's chemistry, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, clinical efficacy, including comparison with other antiemetics, role in controlling nausea, potential role in multi-day chemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation, and overall safety are discussed.
EXPERT OPINION
The clinical data in the literature have established palonosetron as the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist of choice in terms of efficacy and safety for the prevention of CINV for patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Three international guidelines have listed palonosetron as the preferred 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. Due to its higher efficacy, the use of palonosetron may be more cost effective compared to the generic first-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists. Clinical organizations' pharmacy and formulary committees should consider efficacy when making recommendations for agents for the prevention of CINV.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Isoquinolines; Nausea; Palonosetron; Quality of Life; Quinuclidines; Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists; Vomiting
PubMed: 25323946
DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2014.972366 -
Medical Oncology (Northwood, London,... May 2017Although antiemetic management in cancer therapy has improved, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting remain common and troubling adverse events. Chemotherapeutic... (Review)
Review
Although antiemetic management in cancer therapy has improved, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting remain common and troubling adverse events. Chemotherapeutic agents are classified based on their emetogenic effects, and appropriate antiemetics are recommended according to this categorization. Chemotherapy categorized as moderately emetogenic is associated with a wide spectrum of emetic risks. Combined anthracycline and cyclophosphamide regimens have been recently reclassified as highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimen. This review focuses on antiemetic pharmacotherapy in patients receiving non-anthracycline and cyclophosphamide-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. Combination therapy with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor agonist, preferably palonosetron, and dexamethasone is the standard therapy in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, although triple therapy with add-on neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist is used as an alternative treatment strategy. Among moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, carboplatin-containing chemotherapy has considerable emetic potential, particularly during the delayed phase. However, the additional of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to the standard antiemetic therapy prevents carboplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. For regimens including oxaliplatin, the benefit of adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist requires further clarification.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carboplatin; Cyclophosphamide; Humans; Nausea; Vomiting
PubMed: 28365889
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-017-0937-y -
Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical... 2022Spinal surgery is associated with severe pain within the first few days after surgery. Opioids are commonly used to control postoperative pain, but these can lead to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Spinal surgery is associated with severe pain within the first few days after surgery. Opioids are commonly used to control postoperative pain, but these can lead to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Therefore, use of more effective and better-tolerated agents would be beneficial for these patients. Serotonin receptor antagonists, such as ramosetron, have been used to reduce PONV in patients receiving anesthesia.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and tolerance of ramosetron to prevent PONV after spinal surgery.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index databases were systematically searched for relevant RCT articles published between January 1979 and November 2020. Full text articles restricted to English language that described RCTs comparing the use of ramosetron with other serotonin antagonists to treat PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients were considered for meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction of all articles. Differences were resolved by a third reviewer.
RESULTS
The search identified 88 potentially relevant articles, of which only 3 met our selection criteria. Study drugs were administered at the end of spinal surgery in all 3 included articles. The meta-analysis revealed that ramosetron (0.3 mg) reduced the pain score (mean difference = -0.66; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.30), lowered the risk of PONV (risk ratio = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97), and postoperative vomiting (risk ratio = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.60), and limited the use of rescue antiemetics (risk ratio = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.96) after spinal surgery. However, there were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea, the use of rescue pain medications, the number of rescue analgesics required, and the risk of discontinuation of patient-controlled analgesia between ramosetron and palonosetron (0.075 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg). There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of adverse events among the 3 medications.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis of 3 RCTs showed that ramosetron reduced the risk of PONV and POV, limited the use of rescue antiemetics, reduced the postoperative pain score, and did not increase the risk of discontinuing patient-controlled analgesia compared with palonosetron or ondansetron after spinal surgery in 3 RCTs. Therefore, this meta-analysis indicates that ramosetron is an effective and well tolerated antiemetic that can be used to prevent PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42020223596 (. 2022; 83:XXX-XXX)© 2022 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.
PubMed: 35464291
DOI: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2022.100666 -
Current Medical Research and Opinion May 2021Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following surgery, and may be one of the most distressing parts of the surgical journey. With... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following surgery, and may be one of the most distressing parts of the surgical journey. With combination pharmacological therapy recommended for PONV prophylaxis, this systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates whether perioperative palonosetron and dexamethasone is more efficacious than palonosetron administered alone.
METHODS
We searched CENTRAL; EMBASE; CINAHL; Google Scholar; Web of Science citation index; the US clinical trials register; UK clinical trials register; Australia and New Zealand Clinical trials register; and conference abstracts for major anaesthesia conferences in the last three years.We included randomized controlled trials that compared adult patients undergoing surgery who received palonosetron and dexamethasone, against those who received palonosetron.
RESULTS
A total of 12 studies (1152 patients) were included. Medium-grade evidence showed that the palonosetron and dexamethasone combination significantly reduced 24-hour rescue anti-emetic requirement (RR: 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.41-0.86). There was however no significant difference in the 6-hour (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.61-1.09) and 24-hour PONV incidences (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.33-1.10). Similarly, PONV incidences after 24 h did not differ between groups (RR:0.82, 95% CI: 0.59-1.14). Headache and dizziness were the most common side-effects reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Combination prophylaxis with palonosetron and dexamethasone reduces post-operative anti-emetic requirement, although is not associated with a significant difference in PONV. There was considerable heterogeneity in the studies, and trial sequential analysis indicates that further studies are needed to strengthen the clinical evidence.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia; Antiemetics; Dexamethasone; Humans; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
PubMed: 33617380
DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2021.1893677 -
The Journal of International Medical... Jan 2018Background This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Background This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery with general anesthesia. Methods We searched for randomized controlled clinical trials in PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. Results Nine studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis and showed no statistically significant difference between palonosetron and ondansetron in the prevention of PONV in the first 24 hours after surgery (relative risk [RR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-1.10). Palonosetron more effectively prevented vomiting at various time intervals during the first 24 hours postoperatively than did ondansetron: 0-2 hours (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.78), 2-6 hours (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.39-1.40), and 6-24 hours (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.55-2.64). No significant differences in side effects were found between palonosetron and ondansetron (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.40-1.14). Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrated that palonosetron is not more efficacious than ondansetron in the prevention of early PONV. However, palonosetron was more efficacious than ondansetron in the prevention of vomiting after laparoscopic surgery.
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Antiemetics; Humans; Isoquinolines; Laparoscopy; Ondansetron; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Quinuclidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28718727
DOI: 10.1177/0300060517715374 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Aug 2016Antiemetic prophylaxis for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and the development of new antiemetic drugs are expanding areas of research.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Antiemetic prophylaxis for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and the development of new antiemetic drugs are expanding areas of research. However, studies of antiemetic prophylaxis in chemoradiotherapy have not been prioritised, and little is known about the proper timing, duration, and combination of antiemetic drugs for the prevention of chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (C-RINV).
AREAS COVERED
The article summarises the available antiemetic studies, the evidence for antiemetic prophylaxis of C-RINV, and the future perspectives for antiemetic research in chemoradiotherapy.
EXPERT OPINION
Antiemetic prophylaxis for patients receiving concomitant chemoradiotherapy has, for many years, been an orphan research area. The distinction between acute and delayed nausea and vomiting does not apply to fractionated radiotherapy, and prophylaxis should be considered to cover the entire course of treatment and not only the acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The best prophylaxis in women receiving fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin is a combination of the neurokinin receptor antagonist fosaprepitant with palonosetron and dexamethasone. Even with this three-drug combination nausea is a significant problem and the effect of multi-receptor targeting antiemetics such as olanzapine and amisulpride should be explored in this setting.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Cisplatin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Isoquinolines; Morpholines; Nausea; Neoplasms; Palonosetron; Quinuclidines; Receptors, Serotonin, 5-HT3; Vomiting
PubMed: 27322893
DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2016.1202923