Casopitant: a novel NK1-receptor antagonist in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are among the most feared and distressing symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. The knowledge of the pathogenesis and neuropharmacology of CINV has expanded enormously over the last decades, the most significant discoveries being the role of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)3- and neurokinin (NK)1 receptors in the emetic reflex arch. This has led to the development of two new classes of antiemetics acting as highly selective antagonists at one of these receptors. These drugs have had a huge impact in the protection from chemotherapy-induced vomiting, whereas the effect on nausea seems to be limited. The first NK1 receptor antagonist, aprepitant, became clinically available in 2003, and casopitant, the second in this class of antiemetics, has now completed phase III trials. This review delineates the properties and clinical use of casopitant in the prevention of CINV

A multicenter, non-randomized, phase II study of docetaxel and carboplatin administered every 3 weeks as second line chemotherapy in patients with first relapse of platinum sensitive epithelial ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer

In patients with ovarian cancer relapsing at least 6 months after end of primary treatment, the addition of paclitaxel to platinum treatment has been shown to improve survival but at the cost of significant neuropathy. In the first line setting, the carboplatin-docetaxel combination was as effective as the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel but with less neurotoxicity. This study was initiated to evaluate the feasibility of carboplatin with docetaxel as second line treatment in patients with ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. Methods Patients with stage IC-IV epithelial ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer were enrolled at the first relapse after at least 6 months since completion of the first line treatment. Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 was given as an one hour IV infusion followed immediately by carboplatin (AUC = 5) given as a 30–60 min. IV infusion on day 1 and repeated every 3 weeks for 6–9 courses. Primary endpoint was toxicity; secondary endpoints were response rate and the time to progression. Results A total of 74 patients were included. Of these, 50 patients received 6 or more cycles, 13 received 3–5 courses and 11 received less than 3 courses. A total of 398 cycles were given. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was seen in 80% (59 of 74) patients with an incidence of febrile neutropenia of 16%. Grade 2/3 sensory peripheral neuropathy occurred in 7% of patients, but no grade 4 sensory peripheral neuropathy was observed. Sixty patients were evaluable for response. The overall response rate was 70% with 28% complete responses in the response evaluable patient population. Median progression-free survival was 12.4 months (95% CI 10.4-14.4). Conclusions The three-weekly regimen of docetaxel in combination with carboplatin was feasible and active as second-line treatment of platinum-sensitive ovarian, peritoneal and Fallopian tube cancer. The major toxicity was neutropenia, while the frequency of peripheral neuropathy was low.BioMed Central open acces

Effect of a multimodal high intensity exercise intervention in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: randomised controlled trial

Objective To assess the effect of a multimodal group exercise intervention, as an adjunct to conventional care, on fatigue, physical capacity, general wellbeing, physical activity, and quality of life in patients with cancer who were undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy or treatment for advanced disease

Niraparib Maintenance Therapy in Platinum-Sensitive, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND Niraparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2 inhibitor that has shown clinical activity in patients with ovarian cancer. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of niraparib versus placebo as maintenance treatment for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, patients were categorized according to the presence or absence of a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCA cohort and non-gBRCA cohort) and the type of non-gBRCA mutation and were randomly assigned in a 2: 1 ratio to receive niraparib (300 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS Of 553 enrolled patients, 203 were in the gBRCA cohort (with 138 assigned to niraparib and 65 to placebo), and 350 patients were in the non-gBRCA cohort (with 234 assigned to niraparib and 116 to placebo). Patients in the niraparib group had a significantly longer median duration of progression-free survival than did those in the placebo group, including 21.0 vs. 5.5 months in the gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.41), as compared with 12.9 months vs. 3.8 months in the non-gBRCA cohort for patients who had tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.59) and 9.3 months vs. 3.9 months in the overall non-gBRCA cohort (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P < 0.001 for all three comparisons). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were reported in the niraparib group were thrombocytopenia (in 33.8%), anemia (in 25.3%), and neutropenia (in 19.6%), which were managed with dose modifications. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer among those receiving niraparib than among those receiving placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of gBRCA mutations or HRD status, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. (Funded by Tesaro; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01847274.)Tesaro; Amgen; Genentech; Roche; AstraZeneca; Myriad Genetics; Merck; Gradalis; Cerulean; Vermillion; ImmunoGen; Pfizer; Bayer; Nu-Cana BioMed; INSYS Therapeutics; GlaxoSmithKline; Verastem; Mateon Therapeutics; Pharmaceutical Product Development; Clovis Oncology; Janssen/Johnson Johnson; Eli Lilly; Merck Sharp DohmeThis article was published on October 8, 2016; 6 Month Embargo.This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]