-
Annals of Palliative Medicine Apr 2018Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), a common side effect of chemotherapy, can substantially impair a patient's quality of life, interfere with a patient's... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Efficacy of the combination neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, palonosetron, and dexamethasone compared to others for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), a common side effect of chemotherapy, can substantially impair a patient's quality of life, interfere with a patient's compliance with anticancer therapy, and result in the manifestation of adverse events such as electrolyte imbalance, dehydration and malnutrition. The most recent guidelines published by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommend the combination of dexamethasone (DEX), a 5-hydroxytrypatmine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), preferably palonosetron (PALO), and a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) for prophylactic treatment of CINV in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). The aim of this review was to examine the efficacy of triple agent, as reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), compared to any other prophylactic treatments.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE(R), Embase Classic & Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving complete response (CR) in the acute, delayed and overall phase. Secondary endpoints included the percentage of patients who achieved complete control (CC), no nausea and no vomiting in the acute, delayed and overall phases.
RESULTS
A total of 17 RCTs were included in this review, of which 3,146 patients were randomized to receive NK1RA, PALO and DEX, and 2,987 patients to receive other antiemetic treatments. The combination was not superior to other treatments in five endpoints-CC and CR in the acute phase, nausea and emesis control in the delayed phase, and nausea in the overall phase-but was superior in the other 11 endpoints. When looking only at HEC and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) studies, the combination was only superior to others in three endpoints (delayed and overall CC, and overall emesis control) in HEC setting, which is less than the nine identified endpoints (delayed and overall CR, delayed and overall CC, acute and overall nausea control, and acute, delayed and overall phases for emesis control) in the MEC setting.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination of NK1RA, PALO and DEX is superior in the majority of assessed endpoints of this meta-analysis. Further studies should investigate the efficacy and safety of the triple regimen compared to regimens lacking NK1RA, to add to the discussions about whether future CINV prophylaxis guidelines should include NK1RA as a first-line treatment in the MEC setting.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antiemetics; Dexamethasone; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Isoquinolines; Male; Middle Aged; Nausea; Neoplasms; Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists; Palonosetron; Quinuclidines; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Serotonin Antagonists; Vomiting
PubMed: 29764184
DOI: 10.21037/apm.2018.03.09 -
Minerva Anestesiologica Jun 2023Genetic variants may affect drug efficacy on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The understanding of these mechanisms will help to identify the surgical patients... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Genetic variants may affect drug efficacy on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The understanding of these mechanisms will help to identify the surgical patients who might benefit from specific prophylactic and therapeutic antiemetic treatment. The aim of the present review was to investigate gene polymorphisms that influence 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) type 3 receptor antagonists (5HT3RA) efficacy in PONV.
EVIDENCE AQUISITION
We included articles published from 2005 to 2022, utilizing the electronic databases PUBMED, EMBASE, COHRANE Library and ScienceDirect. To explore the relationship between genetic variations and 5HT3 receptor antagonist efficacy in PONV we focused on three different gene polymorphisms: the cytochrome P450 mono-oxygenase system gene (CYP2D6), the adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-binding cassette subfamily B gene (ABCB1) as well as the 5HT3 receptor gene (5HT3R). We also explored the relationship between the above genetic variations and their impact on 5HT3RA efficacy in the context of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Our search retrieved a total of 70 articles; 29 of them were included in the present review. Regarding polymorphisms of the CYP2D6 gene and the efficacy of serotonin antagonists in PONV, the ultra-rapid metabolizer genotype was associated with reduced efficacy of ondansetron, dolasetron and tropisetron, with the latter presenting more pronounced failure in these patients, while granisetron's efficacy remained unaffected. Regarding variations in the ABCB1 gene, three polymorphisms ("2677G>T/A" in exon 21; "3435C>T" in exon 27; "C1236T" in exon 12) were associated with a better response to ondansetron and ramosetron, while they did not affect palonosetron's efficacy. Additionally, polymporphisms of the 5-HT3B receptor gene were associated with ondancetron's postoperative efficacy; the "100_-102AAG" deletion variant was associated with reduced efficacy, while the Y129S variant did not show any effect on the drug's antiemetic effect.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights that inefficacy of a specific drug in managing PONV could be attributed to specific genetic profiles and patients would possibly benefit from a drug switch.
Topics: Humans; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Ondansetron; Pharmacogenetics; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Antiemetics
PubMed: 36852569
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.22.16983-X -
The Medical Letter on Drugs and... Apr 2015
Review
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Combinations; Humans; Isoquinolines; Nausea; Pyridines; Quinuclidines; Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists; Vomiting
PubMed: 25897549
DOI: No ID Found -
Cureus Sep 2022Background Female gender, young age, first chemotherapy cycle, and low alcohol intake have all been linked to an increased risk of nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy....
The Effectiveness of an Oral Fixed-Dose Combination of Netupitant and Palonosetron (NEPA) in Patients With Multiple Risk Factors for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Multicenter, Observational Indian Study.
Background Female gender, young age, first chemotherapy cycle, and low alcohol intake have all been linked to an increased risk of nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy. We intended to see if netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) could prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with risk factors such as age, gender, chemotherapy cycle number, and alcohol consumption history. Methods In this retrospective study, chemotherapy-naïve patients who were prescribed netupitant (300 mg) and palonosetron (0.50 mg) (NEPA) before the first cycle of chemotherapy were analyzed for overall, acute, and delayed phases of complete response (CR), complete protection (CP), and control. Results In the acute phase (AP), delayed phase (DP), and overall phase (OP), complete response was 88.23%, 86.27%, and 86.27%, respectively; complete protection was 80.39%, 78.43%, and 76.47%, respectively; and complete control was 76.47%, 72.54%, and 70.58%, respectively, in the whole population (i.e., 51 patients). Complete response, protection, and control in the overall phase were achieved by 86.27%, 72.72%, and 68.18% of patients who received the highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) regimen (i.e., 44 patients), respectively. Conclusion NEPA provided a consistent magnitude of benefit for patients who are at high risk, receiving HEC and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), and having good control in the acute, delayed, and overall phases of CINV.
PubMed: 36259011
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.29094 -
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Oct 2018Patients undergoing ovarian cancer surgery after chemotherapy and requiring opioid-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) are at high-risk of postoperative nausea and...
Comparison of palonosetron and dexamethasone with ondansetron and dexamethasone for postoperative nausea and vomiting in postchemotherapy ovarian cancer surgeries requiring opioid-based patient-controlled analgesia: A randomised, double-blind, active controlled study.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Patients undergoing ovarian cancer surgery after chemotherapy and requiring opioid-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) are at high-risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We aimed to assess the effect of palonosetron and dexamethasone combination for these patients for prevention of PONV.
METHODS
This study included 2 groups and 150 patients. At the time of wound closure, patients in group A received ondansetron 8 mg intravenous (IV) + dexamethasone 4 mg IV and group B received palonosetron 0.075 mg IV + dexamethasone 4 mg IV. Postoperatively for 48 hours, group A patients received ondansetron 4 mg 8 hourly IV, group B patients received normal saline 8 hourly IV in 2 cc syringe. The primary objective was the overall incidence of PONV. Independent -test, Chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test were used and multivariate regression analysis was done.
RESULTS
Vomiting was significantly higher in group A (37.3%) as compared with group B (21.3%) at 0-48 hours ( = 0.031). Significantly more patients in Group A had nausea as compared with group B at 90-120 minutes (30.66% vs 18.66%, = 0.043) and 6-24 hours (32.0% vs 22.66%, = 0.029). PCA opioid usage in microgram was significantly higher in group A at 0-24 hours (690.53 ± 332.57 vs 576.85 ± 250.79, = 0.024) and 0-48 hours (1126.10 ± 512.18 vs 952.13 ± 353.85, = 0.030).
CONCLUSION
Palonosetron with dexamethasone is more effective than ondasetron with dexamethasone for prevention of PONV in post-chemotherapy ovarian cancer surgeries receiving opioid-based patient controlled analgesia.
PubMed: 30443060
DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_437_18 -
Future Oncology (London, England) Sep 2022To further evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of single-dose versus multiple-dose dexamethasone (DEX) against nausea and vomiting caused by cisplatin. Two similar... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
To further evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of single-dose versus multiple-dose dexamethasone (DEX) against nausea and vomiting caused by cisplatin. Two similar non-inferiority studies were pooled. Patients were randomized to single-day DEX or multiple-day DEX plus palonosetron and neurokinin-1 receptor-antagonists (NK-1RAs). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no vomiting and no rescue medication) during the overall phase. The combined analysis included 242 patients. The absolute risk difference between single day versus multi-day DEX for CR was -2% (95% CI, -14 to 9%). Administration of single-dose DEX offers comparable antiemetic control to multiple-day DEX when combined with palonosetron and an NK-1RA in the setting of single-day cisplatin.
Topics: Humans; Palonosetron; Antiemetics; Cisplatin; Quinuclidines; Isoquinolines; Dexamethasone; Antineoplastic Agents; Vomiting
PubMed: 36017782
DOI: 10.2217/fon-2022-0330 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Aug 2021Palonosetron, a long-acting 5-HT receptor antagonist, is an effective antiemetic agent for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; however, it sometimes causes severe...
PURPOSE
Palonosetron, a long-acting 5-HT receptor antagonist, is an effective antiemetic agent for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; however, it sometimes causes severe constipation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the severity of palonosetron-related constipation.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed the incidence and severity of constipation after intravenous administration of 0.75-mg palonosetron in 150 chemotherapy-naïve patients who received first-line chemotherapy at Saga University Hospital. Constipation was classified into grades 1-5 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with palonosetron-related worsening of constipation to grade 2 or higher.
RESULTS
Palonosetron significantly increased the incidence and severity of constipation (incidence: before vs. after palonosetron, 35.4% vs. 74.0%, p < 0.0001, and severity: before vs. after palonosetron, 26.7% and 8.7% in grades 1 and 2, respectively, vs. 46.7%, 23.3%, and 4.0% in grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively, p < 0.0001). Despite the use of laxatives, 4.0% of patients had grade 3 constipation requiring manual evacuation. Combination treatment with aprepitant (odds ratio (OR), 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-90.0; p = 0.026) and older age (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57; p = 0.039) were factors associated with the severity of constipation.
CONCLUSION
Constipation was more severe in patients receiving combination treatment with aprepitant than in those treated with palonosetron alone. Older age was also associated with increased risk of severe palonosetron-related constipation. Identification of risk factors can help target risk-based laxative therapy.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antiemetics; Constipation; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Palonosetron; Retrospective Studies; Young Adult
PubMed: 33515108
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06023-0 -
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Jan 2020We compared the effects of palonosetron with ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during the first 24 h after surgery in women receiving...
BACKGROUND
We compared the effects of palonosetron with ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during the first 24 h after surgery in women receiving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) with fentanyl for pain control.
METHODS
In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 204 healthy patients who were undergoing elective surgery with general anesthesia were enrolled. In the palonosetron group (n = 102), 0.075 mg bolus was given intravenously (i.v.) 30 min before the end of surgery and 8 ml saline was added to the IV-PCA. In the ondansetron group (n = 102), 8 mg bolus i.v. was given 30 min before the end of surgery and 16 mg of ondansetron was added to the IV-PCA. The incidence of PONV, severity of nausea, and use of rescue anti-emetics were evaluated 6 and 24 h after the operation.
RESULTS
The incidences of nausea (55.6%) and vomiting (14.1%) in the palonosetron group did not differ from those (58.3 and 19.8%) in the ondansetron group during the first 24 h after surgery (P > 0.05). No significant differences were observed in the severity of nausea and use of rescue anti-emetics between the two groups (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
The effects of palonosetron in preventing PONV were not different from those of ondansetron during the first 24 h postoperatively in women receiving IV-PCA with fentanyl.
PubMed: 33329786
DOI: 10.17085/apm.2020.15.1.28 -
Medicine Aug 2021Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an undesirable complication in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Combination therapy via different mechanisms of action...
BACKGROUND
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is an undesirable complication in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Combination therapy via different mechanisms of action for antiemetic prophylaxis has been warranted for effective treatment of PONV. This study was designed to compare the prophylactic antiemetic effect between midazolam combined with palonosetron (group MP) and palonosetron alone (group P) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries.
METHODS
A prospective randomized controlled trial was investigated in non-smoking female. Eighty-eight patients were randomly divided into 2 groups with 44 patients each. Group MP received 0.05 mg/kg of midazolam intravenously before induction of anesthesia whereas group P received the same volume of normal saline. Immediately after anesthetic induction, 0.075 mg of palonosetron was administered to both the groups. The incidence and severity of PONV were assessed during 2 time intervals (0-2 hours, 2-24 hours), postoperatively.
RESULTS
The incidence of PONV during 24 hours after surgery was lower in group MP as compared to group P. There was also a significant difference in the use of rescue antiemetics. The severity of nausea was significantly lower in group MP as compared to group P, in the initial 2 hours after surgery. The incidence of side effects was similar between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION
In the prevention of PONV, midazolam combined with palonosetron, administered during induction of anesthesia was more effective as compared to palonosetron alone.
Topics: Adjuvants, Anesthesia; Adult; Antiemetics; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Female; Humans; Male; Midazolam; Middle Aged; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Prospective Studies; Republic of Korea
PubMed: 34414984
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000026997