Antiemetic therapy for multiple-day chemotherapy and additional topics consisting of rescue antiemetics and high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant: review and consensus statement

Einhorn, Lawrence H.; Grunberg, Steven M.; Rapoport, Bernardo; Rittenberg, Cynthia N.; Feyer, Petra

doi:10.1007/s00520-010-0920-z

Cited by 32 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We wholeheartedly agree with Tendas et al that education on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in bone marrow transplant (BMT) patients is important and might improve outcomes [1][2][3][4].…”

Section: Dear Editorsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…

Dear Editor,We wholeheartedly agree with Tendas et al that education on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in bone marrow transplant (BMT) patients is important and might improve outcomes [1][2][3][4].While we did not ask our survey participants if they took care of BMT patients, one could speculate that the 15-22 % who indicated they disagreed with the need for education on this topic were likely not involved with BMT patients [1]. Importantly, in our survey, a full 78 to 85 % of hematology/ oncology physicians and nurses, respectively, indicated they either agreed or strongly agreed that education on the prevention/management of CINV in BMT is warranted.

That CINV occurs in patients undergoing BMT is reason enough to offer further education on this topic to health-care providers.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Response

Laar

Desai

Jatoi

2015

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dear Editor,We wholeheartedly agree with Tendas et al. that education on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in bone marrow transplant (BMT) patients is important and might improve outcomes [1][2][3][4].While we did not ask our survey participants if they took care of BMT patients, one could speculate that the 15-22 % who indicated they disagreed with the need for education on this topic were likely not involved with BMT patients [1]. Importantly, in our survey, a full 78 to 85 % of hematology/ oncology physicians and nurses, respectively, indicated they either agreed or strongly agreed that education on the prevention/management of CINV in BMT is warranted.That CINV occurs in patients undergoing BMT is reason enough to offer further education on this topic to health-care providers. We applaud the efforts of Tendas and colleagues to raise awareness of this unmet need and agree that a survey to better understand the specific education needs of clinicians who manage CINV in the BMT setting would be beneficial. References

show abstract

Section: Dear Editorsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…

That CINV occurs in patients undergoing BMT is reason enough to offer further education on this topic to health-care providers.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Response

Laar

Desai

Jatoi

2015

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We employ a daily cisplatin regimen (FP therapy with daily administration of cisplatin at 20mg/m 2 from Day 1 to Day 4 and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at 400 mg/m 2 from Day 1 to Day 5) (Brizel et al, 1998) to treat patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), but there have been few studies on the efficacy of aprepitant during daily administration of cisplatin and no specific antiemetic regimen for daily cisplatin therapy has been established (Roila et al, 2010;Basch et al, 2011;Einhorn et al, 2011). When FP therapy is performed at our department, severe nausea tends to occur on or after the last day of cisplatin administration and it has a strong impact on quality of life (Sun et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When FP therapy is performed at our department, severe nausea tends to occur on or after the last day of cisplatin administration and it has a strong impact on quality of life (Sun et al, 2005). There have been several other reports that CINV is most severe on Day 4 or Day 5 during daily administration of cisplatin (Einhorn et al, 2007;Jordan et al, 2009;Roila et al, 2010;Einhorn et al, 2011), suggesting that a new regimen for use of aprepitant during daily cisplatin administration should be established (Ellebaek and Herrstedt, 2008;Roila et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Aprepitant for Nausea in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Daily Cisplatin Therapy

Ishimaru

Takano²,

Katsura³

et al. 2014

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although efficacy of aprepitant for suppressing emesis associated with single-dose cisplatin has been demonstrated, there are limited data on the antiemetic effect of this oral neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist during daily administration of cisplatin. Accordingly, we investigated the efficacy and safety of aprepitant in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving combination therapy with cisplatin and 5-FU (FP therapy). Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with HNC were prospectively studied who received a triple antiemetic regimen comprising granisetron (40μg/kg on Days 1-4), dexamethasone (8 mg on Days 1-4), and aprepitant (125 mg on day 1 and 80mg on days 2-5) with FP therapy (cisplatin 20 mg/m 2 on days 1-4; 5-FU 400 mg/m 2 on days 1-5) (aprepitant group). We also retrospectively studied another 20 HNC patients who received the same regimen except for aprepitant (control group). Results: For efficacy endpoints based on nausea, the aprepitant group showed significantly better results, including a higher rate of complete response (no vomiting and no salvage therapy) for the acute phase (p=0.0342), although there was no marked difference between the two groups with regard to percentage of patients in whom vomiting was suppressed. There were no clinically relevant adverse reactions to aprepitant. Conclusions: This study suggested that a triple antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant is safe and effective for HNC patients receiving daily cisplatin therapy.

show abstract

“…1) For patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), a 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT 3 ) receptor antagonist combined with dexamethasone is usually used as a standard antiemetic therapy. [2][3][4] However, a number of recipients still suffer from uncontrollable CINV. [5][6][7][8][9][10] Therefore, additional options to reduce CINV in these patients are needed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness and Safety of Antiemetic Aprepitant in Japanese Patients Receiving High-Dose Chemotherapy Prior to Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Uchida

Ikesue

Miyamoto

et al. 2013

Biological & Pharmaceutical Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy, a 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist combined with dexamethasone is a standard antiemetic therapy. Despite this prophylactic anti-emetic treatment, many patients still suffer from uncontrollable emesis. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the antiemetic effectiveness and safety of aprepitant (a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist) in addition to 5-HT 3 antagonist in Japanese patients with hematologic malignancy receiving high-dose chemotherapy prior to autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (auto-PBSCT). Twenty-six patients received aprepitant and granisetron (the aprepitant group), whereas, 22 patients received granisetron alone (the control group). All patients received 3 mg of granisetron intravenously 30 min before chemotherapy administration. Patients in the aprepitant group additionally received 125 mg of aprepitant 60-90 min before administration of the first moderately to highly emetogenic chemotherapy. On the next day or thereafter, 80 mg of aprepitant was administered in the morning until the last administration of moderately to highly emetogenic anticancer drugs. The percentage of patients who achieved complete response (CR), defined as no emesis with only grade 1-2 nausea, in the aprepitant group was significantly higher than that in the control group (42% vs. 5%, p=0.003). Logistic regression analysis showed that non-prophylactic use of aprepitant was significantly associated with non-CR. The frequencies of adverse drug events (ADEs) were not significantly different between two groups. In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that the addition of aprepitant to granisetron can improve the antiemetic effect without increasing ADEs in patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy prior to auto-PBSCT.

show abstract

Antiemetic therapy for multiple-day chemotherapy and additional topics consisting of rescue antiemetics and high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant: review and consensus statement

Cited by 32 publications

References 23 publications

Response

Response

Efficacy of Aprepitant for Nausea in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Daily Cisplatin Therapy

Effectiveness and Safety of Antiemetic Aprepitant in Japanese Patients Receiving High-Dose Chemotherapy Prior to Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About