Accéder directement au contenu Accéder directement à la navigation
Article dans une revue

A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Abstract : Background Neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonists (RAs), administered in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) RA and dexamethasone (DEX), have demonstrated clear improvements in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention over a 5-HT(3)RA plus DEX. However, studies comparing the NK1RAs in the class are lacking. A fixed combination of a highly selective NK(1)RA, netupitant, and the 5-HT(3)RA, palonosetron (NEPA), simultaneously targets two critical antiemetic pathways, thereby offering a simple convenient antiemetic with long-lasting protection from CINV. This study is the first head-to-head NK(1)RA comparative study in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Materials and Methods This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, single-cycle, open-label, prospective study designed to demonstrate noninferiority of single-dose NEPA to a 3-day aprepitant regimen in preventing CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving AC/non-AC MEC in a real-life setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (no emesis/no rescue) during the overall (0-120 hour) phase. Noninferiority was achieved if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference between NEPA and the aprepitant group was greater than the noninferiority margin set at -10%. Results Noninferiority of NEPA versus aprepitant was demonstrated (risk difference 9.2%; 95% CI, -2.3% to 20.7%); the overall complete response rate was numerically higher for NEPA (64.9%) than aprepitant (54.1%). Secondary endpoints also revealed numerically higher rates for NEPA than aprepitant. Conclusion This pragmatic study in patients with cancer receiving AC and non-AC MEC revealed that a single dose of oral NEPA plus DEX was at least as effective as a 3-day aprepitant regimen, with indication of a potential efficacy benefit for NEPA. Implications for Practice In the absence of comparative neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonist (RA) studies, guideline committees and clinicians consider NK(1)RA agents to be interchangeable and equivalent. This is the first head-to-head study comparing one NK(1)RA (oral netupitant/palonosetron [NEPA]) versus another (aprepitant) in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Noninferiority of NEPA versus the aprepitant regimen was demonstrated; the overall complete response (no emesis and no rescue use) rate was numerically higher for NEPA (65%) than aprepitant (54%). As a single-dose combination antiemetic, NEPA not only simplifies dosing but may offer a potential efficacy benefit over the current standard-of-care.
Type de document :
Article dans une revue
Liste complète des métadonnées

https://hal-u-picardie.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03598654
Contributeur : Louise DESSAIVRE Connectez-vous pour contacter le contributeur
Soumis le : samedi 5 mars 2022 - 17:21:59
Dernière modification le : jeudi 1 septembre 2022 - 04:04:11

Lien texte intégral

Identifiants

Citation

Laurent Zelek, Philippe Debourdeau, Hugues Bourgeois, Jean Philippe Wagner, Fabien Brocard, et al.. A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy. Oncologist, AlphaMed Press, 2021, 26 (10), pp.E1870-E1879. ⟨10.1002/onco.13888⟩. ⟨hal-03598654⟩

Partager

Métriques

Consultations de la notice

33