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

Comparison of efficacy in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab who did or did not discontinue treatment due to immune-related adverse events:A real-world data study

SIMPLE SUMMARY: This retrospective study of real-world patients with metastatic melanoma shows that discontinuing treatment with combination immunotherapy due to adverse events does not result in a poorer outcome compared to patients that did not discontinue due to toxicity. This is important knowledge for clinicians and patients, as discontinuing treatment may cause great anxiety for patients because they believe that it may limit the response. ABSTRACT: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are very prevalent when treating patients with ipilimumab and nivolumab in combination, and 30–40% of patients discontinue the treatment for this reason. It is of high clinical relevance to investigate the consequences of discontinuing the treatment early since combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab is the first line of treatment for many patients with metastatic melanoma. In this follow-up study, with real-world data from the nationwide DAMMED database, we investigated whether there was a difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients who discontinued or did not discontinue treatment within the first four doses of treatment due to irAEs. In total, 448 patients were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Of these, 133 patients discontinued due to irAEs in the induction phase. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, there was no significant difference in PFS when comparing the group that discontinued with the group that did not discontinue. The group that discontinued had a significantly longer OS than the group that received the full length of treatment. Therefore, we conclude that there is no significant negative impact on efficacy for patients who discontinue due to irAEs in the induction phase of combination immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma

Emetic risk classification and evaluation of the emetogenicity of antineoplastic agents—updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendation

PURPOSE : Our goal was to identify new anticancer agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medical Agency (EMA) since the 2016 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic update and classify their emetic potential. METHODS : The MASCC/ESMO Expert Panel classified the emetogenicity of the identified new antineoplastic agents based on nonsystematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, analysis of product labeling, and evaluation of emetic classification in other international guidelines and informal consensus. The emetogenic classification system for oral anticancer agents was revised into two emetic risk categories (minimal–low; moderate–high) to be consistent with the system reported by ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) in their 2017 guideline update. The previously employed four emetic risk classification categories for intravenously administered antineoplastic agents were retained for this update. RESULTS : From June 2015 to January 2023, 107 new antineoplastic agents (44 intravenously administered and 63 orally administered agents) were identified. The reported incidence of vomiting varied significantly across studies for many agents, especially for oral anticancer agents. CONCLUSION : The MASCC/ESMO Expert Panel acknowledges the limitations of our efforts to classify the emetic potential of anticancer agents, especially the imprecision associated with oral agents. However, we have attempted to provide a reasonable approximation of the emetic risk associated with new antineoplastic agents by searching the available literature and reviewing other available international antiemetic guidelines.Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.https://www.springer.com/journal/520hj2024ImmunologySDG-03:Good heatlh and well-bein

Addressing Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Using Multi-Frequency Vibrometry and Patient-Reported Outcomes

(1) The study evaluated correlations between multi-frequency vibrometry (MF-V) and the measure of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy developed by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (CIPN18). (2) Patients with cancer scheduled to undergo treatment with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) or carboplatin and paclitaxel (Carbo-Tax) were recruited in a prospective, observational study with MF-V and the CIPN18 from baseline to one year after end of treatment. (3) The study recruited 31 evaluable patients. All MF-V measurements correlated significantly with the CIPN18 scores (r = 0.25–0.48, p > 0.003), with a low frequency (32 Hz) from metatarsals showing the best correlation coefficients (0.059 Z-score per CIPN18 point change, r = 0.48, CI-95 = [0.32; 0.60], p > 0.0001). The largest change in MF-V scores from baseline was seen in low-frequency VPTs taken from metatarsals at 8 Hz three months after end of treatment (from −0.26, CI-95 [−0.85, 0.38] to 1.15, CI-95 [0.53, 1.84]) for patients treated with oxaliplatin and at 32 Hz one year after end of treatment (from 0.09, CI-95 [−0.56, 0.77] to 0.88, CI-95 [0.34, 1.47]) for patients treated with paclitaxel. (4) Low-frequency vibration perception thresholds (8 and 32 Hz) correlated better with CIPN18 scores than high-frequency ones (128 and 250 Hz). If validated, this finding will advance CIPN pathophysiological understanding and inform the development of assessment methods

Outcome of adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world nation-wide cohort of patients with melanoma

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated promising outcomes for adjuvant immunotherapy in patients with resected melanoma. Real-life data provide valuable insights to support patient guidance and treatment decisions.METHODS: Observational population-based study examining a national cohort of patients with resected stage III-IV melanoma referred for adjuvant therapy. Data were extracted from the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED).RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 785 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1. The majority had stage III resected melanoma (87%), normal LDH levels (80%), and performance score 0 (87%). Patients were followed for a median of 25.6 months (95%CI 24-28). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were not reached. The RFS was 78% (95%CI 75-81), 66% (63-70), and 59% (55-63); MSS was 97% (95-98), 93% (91-95), and 87% (84-90) at 1-, 2-, and 3-year; respectively. Less than half (42%) of the patients finalized planned therapy, 32% discontinued due to toxicity, and 19% due to melanoma recurrence. Patients discontinuing adjuvant treatment prematurely, without recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing therapy. In a multivariable analysis, ipilimumab plus nivolumab did not improve outcomes compared to ipilimumab monotherapy as a first-line metastatic treatment after adjuvant anti-PD-1.CONCLUSION: Survival outcomes in real-world patients with melanoma treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 align with results from the randomized controlled trials. Patients discontinuing therapy prematurely, for other reasons than recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing planned treatment. First-line metastatic treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab post-adjuvant anti-PD-1 did not show improved outcomes compared to ipilimumab/anti-PD-1 monotherapy.</p