A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial evaluating olanzapine 5 mg combined with standard antiemetic therapy for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy: J-FORCE Study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11503-11503
Author(s):  
Hironobu Hashimoto ◽  
Masakazu Abe ◽  
Masahiko Nakao ◽  
Hideaki Mizutani ◽  
Yasuhiko Sakata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Antiemetic Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Delayed Phase

11503 Background: Olanzapine (OLZ) 10 mg added to standard antiemetic therapy including aprepitant (APR), palonosetron (PALO), and dexamethasone (DEX) has been recommended for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) caused by highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Guidelines suggest that a dose of 5 mg should be taken into consideration in patients at risk of sedation. OLZ 5 mg showed an equivalent activity and favorable toxicity to somnolence in several phase II studies. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial to evaluate OLZ 5 mg in addition to standard antiemetic therapy for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Methods: Patients receiving cisplatin (≥ 50 mg/m2) were randomly assigned to either OLZ 5 mg or placebo on days 1–4, combined with APR, PALO and DEX. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR), defined as no vomiting and no rescue medications in the delayed phase (24–120 h). A total of 690 patients were required to detect a 10% increase in CR from 65% in the placebo to 75% in the OLZ, with a one-sided alpha of 2.5% and a power of 80%. Results: A total of 710 patients were enrolled (OLZ 356 and placebo 354). CR in the delayed phase was 79.1% (95% CI: 74.9–83.3) in the OLZ 5 mg and 65.8% (95% CI: 60.9–70.8) in the placebo ( p < 0.001). Other efficacy results are summarized in Table. The most common treatment-related adverse events was somnolence (43.1% for OLZ vs. 33.0% for placebo). Conclusions: OLZ 5 mg combined with APR, PALO and DEX can be considered a new standard antiemetic therapy in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: UMIN000024676. [Table: see text]

Efficacy of Thalidomide in Preventing Delayed Nausea and Vomiting Induced by Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Trial (CLOG1302 study)

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (31) ◽  
pp. 3558-3565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lingyun Zhang ◽  
Xiujuan Qu ◽  
Yuee Teng ◽  
Jing Shi ◽  
Ping Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Delayed Nausea

Purpose We examined the efficacy and safety of thalidomide (THD) for the prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting in patients who received highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Patients and Methods In a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase III trial, chemotherapy-naive patients with cancer who were scheduled to receive HEC that contained cisplatin or cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin/epirubincin ≥ 50 mg/m2 regimens were randomly assigned to a THD group (100 mg twice daily on days 1 to 5) or placebo group, both with palonosetron (0.25 mg on day 1) and dexamethasone (12 mg on day 1; 8 mg on days 2 to 4). Primary end point was complete response to vomiting—no emesis or use of rescue medication—in the delayed phase (25 to 120 h). Nausea and anorexia on days 1 to 5 were evaluated by the 4-point Likert scale (0, no symptoms; 3, severe). Quality of life was assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 version 3 questionnaire on days −1 and 6. Results Of 656 patients, 638 were evaluable: 317 in the THD group and 321 in the control group. Compared with placebo, delayed and overall (0 to 120 h) complete response rates to vomiting were significantly higher with THD: 76.9% versus 61.7% ( P < .001) and 66.1% versus 53.3% ( P = .001), respectively. Rates of no nausea were also higher in the THD group (delayed: 47.3% v 33.3%; P < .001; overall: 41% v 29.6%; P = .003), and mean scores of anorexia were lower overall (0.44 ± 0.717 v 0.64 ± 0.844; P = .003). Adverse effects were mild to moderate. The THD group had increased sedation, dizziness, constipation, and dry mouth, but experienced better quality of life after chemotherapy. Conclusion Thalidomide combined with palonosetron and dexamethasone significantly improved HEC-induced delayed nausea and vomiting prevention in chemotherapy-naive patients.

The Oral Neurokinin-1 Antagonist Aprepitant for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Multinational, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial in Patients Receiving High-Dose Cisplatin—The Aprepitant Protocol 052 Study Group

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (22) ◽  
pp. 4112-4119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. Hesketh ◽  
Steven M. Grunberg ◽  
Richard J. Gralla ◽  
David G. Warr ◽  
Fausto Roila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Standard Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Rescue Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo

Purpose: In early clinical trials with patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy, the neurokinin antagonist aprepitant significantly enhanced the efficacy of a standard antiemetic regimen consisting of a type-three 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonist and a corticosteroid. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study was performed to establish definitively the superiority of the aprepitant regimen versus standard therapy in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Patients and Methods: Patients receiving cisplatin ≥ 70 mg/m2 for the first time were given either standard therapy (ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1; dexamethasone on days 2 to 4) or an aprepitant regimen (aprepitant plus ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1; aprepitant and dexamethasone on days 2 to 3; dexamethasone on day 4). Patients recorded nausea and vomiting episodes in a diary. The primary end point was complete response (no emesis and no rescue therapy) on days 1 to 5 postcisplatin, analyzed by a modified intent-to-treat approach. Treatment comparisons were made using logistic regression models. Tolerability was assessed by reported adverse events and physical and laboratory assessments. Results: The percentage of patients with complete response on days 1 to 5 was significantly higher in the aprepitant group (72.7% [n = 260] v 52.3% in the standard therapy group [n = 260]), as were the percentages on day 1, and especially on days 2 to 5 (P < .001 for all three comparisons). Conclusion: Compared with standard dual therapy, addition of aprepitant was generally well tolerated and provided consistently superior protection against CINV in patients receiving highly emetogenic cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Efficacy of olanzapine combined with the standard triplet antiemetic therapy for cisplatin-based chemotherapy: A sub-analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (J-FORCE).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12098-12098
Author(s):  
Yukiyoshi Fujita ◽  
Masakazu Abe ◽  
Takuhiro Yamaguchi ◽  
Hiroki Ueda ◽  
Koichi Kitagawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Rescue Medication ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Antiemetic Therapy ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Delayed Phase

12098 Background: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (J-FORCE), we previously reported the efficacy of olanzapine (OLZ) 5 mg plus triplet antiemetic therapy for cisplatin (CDDP)-based chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in the delayed phase (24–120 h after CDDP treatment). Here, we report the results of a pre-planned subgroup analysis of this trial (in which risk factors were used as the allocation factors). This analysis was designed to determine which patients benefit more from OLZ. Methods: Subgroup analysis was performed on complete response (CR: no emesis and no rescue medication) in the acute (within 24 h of CDDP treatment) and delayed phase and time to treatment failure (TTF: time from CDDP treatment to the first vomiting or use of rescue medication). Data from 705 patients in the efficacy analysis population (354 in the OLZ group and 351 in the placebo (PLA) group) were analyzed by sex (male/female), age (≥55 years/ < 55 years), and CDDP dose (≥70 mg/m2/ < 70 mg/m2). For CR, we calculated point estimates of differences between groups and 95% confidence intervals and performed a Mantel-Haenszel test. We used the Kaplan-Meier method for the analysis of TTF, and comparisons between groups were made using a log-rank test. Results: Delayed CR (OLZ versus PLA) and risk difference (RD) of delayed CR following OLZ treatment were significantly greater than following PLA in the following subgroups: male (83.1% versus 70.5%, RD 12.6%, p = 0.001), female (70.9% versus 56.4%, RD 14.5%, p = 0.021), age ≥55 years (78.7% versus 67.6%, RD 11.1%, p = 0.003), age < 55 years (81.0% versus 57.4%, RD 23.6%, p = 0.005), and CDDP ≥70 mg/m2 (78.8% versus 65.3%, RD 13.5%, p < 0.001). TTF of all subgroups (male/female, ≥55 years/ < 55 years, and ≥70 mg/m2/ < 70 mg/m2) was significantly longer in the OLZ group than in the PLA group (HR 0.493, p < 0.001; HR 0.612, p = 0.022; HR 0.586, p < 0.001; HR 0.401, p = 0.005; HR 0.546, p < 0.001; HR 0.543, p = 0.031, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest a benefit of OLZ 5 mg plus triplet therapy regardless of risk factors for CDDP-based CINV. Clinical trial information: UMIN000024676. [Table: see text]

Phase III study of APF530 versus ondansetron with a neurokinin 1 antagonist + corticosteroid in preventing highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: MAGIC trial.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 68-68
Author(s):  
Ian D. Schnadig ◽  
Richy Agajanian ◽  
Shaker R. Dakhil ◽  
Nashat Y. Gabrail ◽  
Robert E. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Unmet Need ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Drug Regimen ◽  
Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
Delayed Phase

68 Background: Managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with delayed ( > 24-120 h) highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) is an unmet need. APF530, extended-release granisetron, provides sustained release over ≥ 5 days to prevent acute (0-24 h) and delayed CINV. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of APF530 in preventing CINV after HEC in a 3-drug regimen vs a standard 3-drug regimen with ondansetron (Ond). Methods: In this double-blind, multicenter study (NCT02106494), patients (pts) receiving single-day HEC (2011 ASCO guidelines) were randomized 1:1 to APF530 500 mg SC (10 mg granisetron) or Ond 0.15 mg/kg IV and stratified by cisplatin ( ≥ 50 mg/m2, yes/no). Pts were scheduled to receive concomitant dexamethasone (Dex) 12 mg IV + fosaprepitant (Fos) 150 mg IV on day 1 + PO Dex on days 2-4. The primary end point was delayed-phase complete response (CR) (no emesis, no rescue medication). Secondary end points included CR in acute and overall phases and complete control (CC; CR and no more than mild nausea) in acute, delayed, and overall phases. Treatment (tx) comparisons used chi-square test controlling for cisplatin. Adverse events (AEs) and injection-site reactions (ISRs) were assessed. Results: Modified intent-to-treat analysis included 902 pts (APF530, n = 450; Ond, n = 452) with baseline demographics balanced between tx groups. A significantly higher % of APF530 (65%) vs Ond (57%) pts had delayed-phase CR (P= .014). A significantly higher % of APF530 (61%) vs Ond (53%) pts had delayed-phase CC (P= .022, Table). CR and CC rates in acute and overall phases were numerically higher with APF530 vs Ond, but not statistically significant. APF530 was well tolerated. Most common AEs were ISRs, mostly mild or moderate. Conclusions: APF530 with Fos+Dex led to statistically higher CR and CC rates in delayed-phase CINV with HEC vs a standard 3-drug regimen of Ond with Fos+Dex. Clinical trial information: NCT02106494. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document