scholarly journals A Randomized Trial of Olanzapine and Palonosetron versus Infused Ondansetron for the Treatment of Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1910-1910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Midori Nakagaki ◽  
Michael Barras ◽  
Cameron Curley ◽  
Jason P Butler ◽  
Glen A Kennedy

Abstract Background: Despite routine antiemetic administration during conditioning for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), breakthrough chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can still be problematic. Recent studies in solid tumor therapy have demonstrated effectiveness of both olanzapine and the second generation 5HT3 receptor antagonist palonosetron in management of CINV. However, there remains little comparative data on efficacy of these agents, especially within HSCT. Aims: To compare the effectiveness of olanzapine and palonosetron to an ondansetron infusion (standard of care) for the treatment of breakthrough CINV in patients undergoing HSCT. Method: A randomized open-label prospective study was performed in HSCT patients suffering breakthrough CINV during conditioning despite standard prophylaxis with IV ondansetron 8mg TDS plus a single dose of oral aprepitant 165mg. Patients were randomised on a 1:1:1 basis to receive either ondansetron 32mg in 250ml normal saline as a continuous infusion over 24 hours, an olanzapine wafer 10mg once daily, or a single dose of palonosetron 0.25mg IV. All groups were allowed prn metoclopramide IV and / or lorazepam SL as rescue anti-nausea medication. Nausea score was graded from 0 (no nausea) to 100 (worst nausea) and recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary endpoint was a composite outcome of no emesis, no use of rescue medication, and nausea score reduction of >50%. The secondary endpoint was nausea score reduction of >50%. Both endpoints were measure at 24 and 48hrs after initiation of the study treatment. Statistical analysis was conducted using a double-sided Fisher's exact test. Results: In total, 18, 22 and 22 patients were randomized to the ondansetron, olanzapine and palonosetron arms respectively. Overall 53% of patients had undergone autologous and 47% allogeneic HSCT. Conditioning regimens included high dose melphalan (200mg/m2) and BEAM for autologous HSCT and Cy / TBI and fludarabine / melphalan (melphalan 120mg/m2) for allogeneic protocols. A similar proportion of patients randomized to ondansetron versus olanzapine versus palonosetron received autologous versus allogeneic HSCT, with similar ratios of individual conditioning regimens included within each arm (p=NS for all comparisons). Patients' age, gender and other risk factors such as history of CINV were also similar between arms (p=NS for all comparisons). The primary endpoint was achieved in 6%, 45% and 18%, and 6%, 64% and 18% of ondansetron versus olanzapine versus palonosetron patient groups at 24 and 48hrs respectively. Overall olanzapine was significantly more effective at controlling breakthrough CINV compared to ondansetron at both 24 and 48hrs (p=0.011 and 0.0002 respectively). Olanzapine was also more effective than palonosetron at 48hrs (p=0.005). The secondary outcome was observed in 17%, 60% and 62%, and 35%, 71% and 43% of ondansetron versus olanzapine versus palonosetron patient groups at 24 and 48hrs respectively. Again, olanzapine was superior to ondansetron at controlling nausea at both 24 and 48hrs (p=0.0009 and p=0.048 respectively). However, there was no significant difference between olanzapine and palonosetron in reduction of nausea score >50% at either time point. Palonosetron was superior to ondansetron at nausea control at 24 (p=0.008) but not at 48hrs. Serious adverse drug reactions were not reported in any arms, and median duration from stem cell infusion to the engraftment was 13 days, 13 days and 14 days for ondansetron, olanzapine and palonosetron arms respectively (p=NS). Conclusions: When compared to ondansetron infusion and a single dose of palonosetron, daily olanzapine is superior treatment of breakthrough CINV in patients undergoing HSCT. A single dose of palonosetron does not significantly reduce emesis but is effective for the treatment of nausea up to 24 hours. Further studies are required to determine the ideal dosing frequency of palonosetron. Disclosures Off Label Use: Olanzapine is used as an antiemetic, which is widely accepted..

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4489-4489
Author(s):  
Joshua A Fein ◽  
Avichai Shimoni ◽  
Ivetta Danylesko ◽  
Noga Shem-Tov ◽  
Ronit Yerushalmi ◽  
...  

Background: In recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), organ toxicity is a barrier to administering high-intensity conditioning regimens. We hypothesized that determinants of acute organ toxicity are specific to individual conditioning regimens. We sought to characterize toxicities across common transplantation regimens, evaluate their prognostic implication, and derive predictors of severe toxicity at the regimen level. Methods: This retrospective study included adults undergoing first allogeneic HSCT at a single center between the years of 2001 and 2014 (median: 2010). Patients received grafts from matched sibling or unrelated donors and were conditioned with any of the following regimens: Cyclophosphamide + TBI (Cy/TBI), Busulfan + Cyclophosphamide (Bu/Cy), Fludarabine + 12.8 mg Busulfan (Flu/Bu4), Fludarabine + 6.4 mg Busulfan (Flu/Bu2), Fludarabine + 36-42 gr/m2 Treosulfan (Flu/Treo), and Fludarabine + 100-140 mg/m2 Melphalan (Flu/Mel). Toxicities were defined by the KDIGO scale for acute kidney injury (AKI) and by the CTCAE v. 5.0 for increases in total bilirubin, AST, ALT, and alkaline phosphatase (Alk. Phos.) The incidence of toxicities from the start of conditioning through 30 days post-transplantation was tabulated by regimen. Risk factors for severe organ toxicity were assessed within each regimen cohort using multivariable logistic regressions. Results: In a cohort of 707 patients, the median age was 52 years. The main indications for transplantation were acute leukemia (57%), myelodysplastic syndrome (13%), and aggressive lymphoma (9%). Graft-versus-host-disease prophylaxis included methotrexate in 80% of patients, and 56% received anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG). The most common regimens were Flu/Treo (n = 160) and Bu/Cy (n = 141). As expected, patient characteristics varied between regimens. The incidence of AKI and increased serum bilirubin in each regimen is shown in Figure 1A and 1B, respectively. Sinusoidal-obstructive syndrome (6% overall) accounted for only 17% of gr. ≥ 3 bilirubinemia in the entire cohort. Elevations in AST, ALT, and Alk. Phos of gr. ≥ 3 were not common (<8%). In multivariable logistic regression, AKI gr. ≥ 2, increased bilirubin gr. ≥ 3, AST gr. ≥ 3, and Alk. Phos. gr. ≥ 2 were associated with increased 100-day mortality (p < 0.05). Acute severe organ toxicity (ASOT) was defined as the occurrence of any of these toxicities. ASOT had an odds ratio (OR) of 3.4 (95% CI: 2.2-5.3) for 100-day mortality. Within each regimen, we studied the relationship between ASOT and transplantation/patient characteristics (Figure 1C). Elevations in baseline bilirubin were predictive of ASOT in Cy/TBI (OR: 1.68 [1.19-2.37]), while increasing creatinine was predictive in patients conditioned with Flu/Mel (OR: 1.43 [1.09-1.88]). High-risk disease (DRI) was associated with increased risk in patients receiving Flu/Bu4 (1.26 [1.01-1.58]). In patients treated with Bu/Cy, administration of ATG increased the risk of ASOT (1.31 [1.11-1.55]). Conclusion: Allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients are at high risk for acute organ damage. We describe patterns of renal and liver toxicity across several regimens. Determinants of acute severe organ toxicity, defined as those associated with short-term mortality, are regimen dependent. Our findings suggest that these factors should be considered when selecting the preparative regimen. While requiring validation, the newly-defined composite endpoint of acute severe organ toxicity (ASOT) may be valuable in studying transplantation strategies. Figure 1 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (5) ◽  
pp. 1767-1769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanya H. Burkholder ◽  
Lyn Colenda ◽  
Laura M. Tuschong ◽  
Matthew F. Starost ◽  
Thomas R. Bauer ◽  
...  

Nonmyeloablative conditioning regimens are increasingly replacing myeolablative conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT). The recent advent of these conditioning regimens has limited the assessment of the long-term effects of this treatment, including analysis of reproductive function. To address the question of reproductive function after nonmyeloablative transplantation, we analyzed a cohort of young dogs with the genetic disease canine leukocyte adhesion deficiency that were treated with a nonmyeloablative dose of 200 cGy total body irradiation followed by matched-littermate SCT. Five males and 5 females entered puberty; all 5 males and 4 females subsequently sired or delivered litters following transplantation. We demonstrate that fertility is intact and dogs have uncomplicated parturitions following nonmyeloablative conditioning for SCT. These results are encouraging for children and adults of childbearing age who receive similar conditioning regimens prior to allogeneic transplantation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document