Toshinobu Hayashi

Randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of palonosetron versus granisetron in the triplet regimen for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting after highly emetogenic chemotherapy: TRIPLE study

BACKGROUND There has been no phase III study of comparing the efficacy of first- and second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in the triplet regimen with dexamethasone and aprepitant for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with a malignant solid tumor who would receive HEC containing 50 mg/m(2) or more cisplatin were randomly assigned to either palonosetron (0.75 mg) arm (Arm P) or granisetron (1 mg) arm (Arm G), on day 1, both arms with dexamethasone (12 mg on day 1 and 8 mg on days 2-4) and aprepitant (125 mg on day 1 and 80 mg on days 2-3). The primary end point was complete response (CR; no vomiting/retching and no rescue medication) at the 0-120 h period and secondary end points included complete control (CC; no vomiting/retching, no rescue medication, and no more than mild nausea) and total control (TC; no vomiting/retching, no rescue medication, and no nausea). RESULTS Between July 2011 and June 2012, 842 patients were enrolled. Of 827 evaluable, 272 of 414 patients (65.7%) in Arm P had a CR at the 0-120 h period when compared with 244 of 413 (59.1%) in Arm G (P = 0.0539). Both arms had the same CR rate of 91.8% at the acute (0-24 h) period, while at the delayed (24-120 h) period, Arm P had a significantly higher CR rate than Arm G (67.2% versus 59.1%; P = 0.0142). In secondary end points, Arm P had significantly higher rates than Arm G at the 0-120 h period (CC rate: 63.8% versus 55.9%, P = 0.0234; TC rate: 47.6% versus 40.7%, P = 0.0369) and delayed periods (CC rate: 65.2% versus 55.9%, P = 0.0053; TC rate: 48.6% versus 41.4%, P = 0.0369). CONCLUSION The present study did not show the superiority of palonosetron when compared with granisetron in the triplet regimen regarding the primary end point. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY IDENTIFIER UMIN000004863.

Influence of ABCB1 and ABCG2 polymorphisms on the antiemetic efficacy in patients with cancer receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy: a TRIPLE pharmacogenomics study

Resistance to antiemetic treatment with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist is an issue. This study evaluated the potential roles of ABCB1 and ABCG2 polymorphisms in antiemetic treatment resistance in patients with cancer previously enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. A total of 156 patients were evaluated for their responses to antiemetic therapy and then subdivided into granisetron or palonosetron groups. The genotypes were evaluated for their association with antiemetic efficacy in each treatment groups. Additional risk factors associated with complete response (CR) were examined using a multivariate regression analysis. No significant associations were identified for genetic polymorphisms in the palonosetron group. In the granisetron group, patients with ABCB1 2677TT and 3435TT genotypes had higher proportion of CR. In addition to ABCB1 polymorphisms, gender and cisplatin dose were associated with granisetron response by univariate analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the ABCB1 3435C>T polymorphism and cisplatin dose were significant predictors of CR.

Genetic risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy

PurposeYounger age and female sex have already been well-known risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and 30–50% of cancer patients still suffer from CINV. Genetic polymorphisms are suggested to influence antiemetic treatment response.MethodsThis study included a subset of patients previously enrolled in a randomised controlled trial; 156 patients were evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the role of pharmacogenomic polymorphisms relevant to antiemetic response in patients with cancer receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The study’s efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with complete response (CR). The study endpoint was evaluated separately in the acute (CR0–24) and delayed (CR24–120) phases. Thirteen polymorphisms were genotyped, and the association of these genotypes with the efficacy of prophylactic antiemetics was then investigated. Confounding variables for the CR were identified using stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis. Age and sex were included as independent variables by the forced-entry method, and the stepwise method was used to select the pharmacogenomic factors for inclusion as independent variables.ResultsMultivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the ERCC1 8092AA (odds ratio [OR] = 11.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74–72.71; p = 0.011) and female sex (OR = 3.63; 95% CI 1.14–11.58; p = 0.029) were significant predictors of CR0–24. No significant association of CR24–120 with pharmacogenomic polymorphisms was found via multivariate logistic regression analysis.ConclusionsERCC1 polymorphism influenced the extent of CINV control in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy.Trial registrationClinical trial information: UMIN 000009335