A supersaturated calcium phosphate solution seems to effectively prevent and treat oral mucositis in haematopoietic stem cell transplanted cancer patients - single centre experience.

PURPOSE: Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the most frequent and bothersome complications of high-dose chemotherapy with subsequent auto- and allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). We have assessed the effectiveness of supersaturated calcium phosphate rinse (Caphosol ®) and palifermin (Kepivance®) in the prophylaxis of OM caused by HSCT. METHODS: Caphosol® and Kepivance® were prospectively evaluated in OM prophylaxis in 64 patients after HSCT and compared against themselves and an historical control group. RESULTS: Grade 3 and 4 OM was not observed in patients treated with Caphosol® and palifermin. None of those patients needed total parenteral nutrition (TPN), too. In the Caphosol® group 40.9% of the patients did not develop OM, and 70% of patients treated with palifermin were free of any kind of OM symptoms. In the control group OM was observed in all cases. CONCLUSION: Caphosol® seems to decrease the incidence, severity and duration of OM, the demand for opioids and for TPN. It needs to be tested in randomized trials, because its easy administration and cost-effectiveness may render it a valuable addition to the standard care in the treatment of OM.

Triple drug combination in the prevention of nausea and vomiting following busulfan plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

PURPOSE: A clinical study of triple drug combination (aprepitant+palonosetron+ dexamethasone) was carried out to evaluate its efficacy in preventing both acute and delayed emesis after high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) with busulphan+cyclophosphamide (BuCy) before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). METHODS: The study enrolled 60 patients suffering from various hematological malignancies: 20 in the triple drug antiemetic group and 20 in each of two historical control groups that received dexamethasone plus either ondansetron or palonosetron. The groups were comparable for statistical analysis. The observation period started with the initiation of chemotherapy (0 h) and continued for 24 h after its completion for the acute phase, and during 5 days after finishing chemotherapy for the delayed phase. The response rate of the study drugs was evaluated by a 4-grade scale based on the condition of nausea and vomiting: highly, moderately or slightly effective and not effective. RESULTS: Patients treated with the triple drug combination had significantly higher response rates than those receiving palonosetron or ondansetron (+ dexamethasone) during both the acute and delayed phases: highly effective in early + late phases: 55 vs. 30 vs. 20%; highly effective in early phase: 70 vs. 30 vs. 20%; highly effective in late phase: 55 vs. 55 vs. 30%; highly + moderately effective in early phase: 75 vs. 32 vs. 25%; highly + moderately effective in late phase: 85 vs. 60 vs. 40% for triple drug combination, palonosetron + dexamethasone and ondansetron + dexamethasone, respectively. CONCLUSION: This triple drug combination was more effective than ondansetron or palonosetron (+ dexamethasone) in preventing acute (especially), and delayed nausea and vomiting following BuCy chemotherapy before HSCT.

A triple-drug combination to prevent nausea and vomiting following BEAM chemotherapy before autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a clinical study of a triple-drug combination to evaluate its efficacy to prevent both acute and delayed emesis after high-dose chemotherapy with BEAM (BCNU [carmustine]+etoposide+ARA-C [cytarabine]+melphalan) before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) by comparison with a historical control group of patients treated with dexamethasone (dex) and ondansetron or palonosetron. METHODS: We evaluated 96 patients non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (n=54), and Hodgkin's disease (n=42). Evaluated patients received: aprepitant+palonosetron and dex. The observation period started with the initiation of chemotherapy (0 hours) and continued for 24 hours after the completion of the chemotherapy for the acute phase, and during 5 days after finishing chemotherapy for the delayed phase. The response rate to study drugs was evaluated using a four-grade scale based on the degree of control of nausea and vomiting: high, modrate, slightly effective, or not effective. RESULTS: Patients treated with the three-drug combination showed a significantly higher response rate than those receiving palonosetron or ondasetron (+dex) during the both the acute and the delayed phases: highly effective early+late phases, 82% versus 70% versus 35%; highly effective early phase, 94% versus 70% versus 35%; highly effective late phase, 85% versus 85% versus 50%; highly+moderately effective early phase, 97% versus 70% versus 40%; highly+moderately effective late phase, 97% versus 90% versus 60%, for triple combination, palonosctron with dexamethasone and ondasetron+dex, respectively. All antiemetic regimens were well tolerated. The three-drug combination showed a similar safety profile; adverse events were generally mild and transient. CONCLUSIONS: The triple-drug combination was more effective than ondansetron or palonosetron (+dex) treatments to prevent acute (especially) and delayed nausea and vomiting following BEAM before HSCT.

Efficiency of supersaturated calcium phosphate mouth rinse treatment in patients receiving high-dose melphalan or BEAM prior to autologous blood stem cell transplantation: a single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Oral mucositis (OM) is an unresolved problem among patients treated with a high-dose therapy supported by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). We tested the ability of supersaturated calcium phosphate mouth rinse (Caphosol) to ameliorate oral mucosal injury induced by a conditioning regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients with hematologic malignancies were treated with Caphosol to prevent OM during HSCT procedures. The conditioning regimens for 16 patients were BGNU 300 mg/m2, day 6; ARA-C 200 mg/m2 daily, days 5, 4, 3, 2; VP-16 200 mg/m2 daily, days 5, 4, 3, 2; L-PAM 140 mg/m2, day 1 (BEAM) and for 16 patients, MEL 200 (non-Hodgkin's lymphoma). A control group was composed of 24 consecutive patients, who had been treated with HSCT before Caphosol was available. The source of the graft was autologous peripheral blood. RESULTS: Among patients treated with Caphosol no one had to receive total parenteral nutrition. Among the BEAM group no one experienced III to IV degree OM compared with 40% of the control group. The median OM duration was 2.25 days versus controls of 8.6, (P<.001); only one patient received opioids versus 100% of controls. In the MEL 200 group, 93.7% of patients developed 0 to II degree OM vs 94% of the control group (P=.74) with median duration of 1, 73 days versus 2.42 for the controls (P=.73). In both control and Caphosol cohorts one patient received opioids. CONCLUSION: Caphosol may reduce the incidence, severity, and duration of oral mucositis and decrease the number of days with painkillers among patients treated with a BEAM but not a Mel 200 regimen.

Palonosetron in prevention of nausea and vomiting after highly emetogenic chemotherapy before haematopoietic stem cell transplantation-single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: A clinical study of palonosetron was performed to evaluate its efficacy in preventing both acute and delayed emesis after high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) using a historical control group of patients treated with ondansetron as the comparative drug. METHODS: Among the 46 evaluated patients 20 with lymphoma received BEAM as the conditioning regimen; 16 has relapsed germ cell tumors treated with CARBOPEC; and 10 with acute myeloid leukemia received BuCY. Increasing severity of nausea was evaluated according to the following 4-grade scale: none (no nausea); mild (slight nausea but no disruption to daily activities); moderate (nausea and some disruption to daily activities); and severe (extreme nausea and severe disruption to daily activities). The emetic response rate was evaluated using the criteria: complete (no emetic episode); major (1-2 episodes); minor (3-5 episodes); and failure (>5 episodes). The response rate of the study drugs was evaluated by the following 4-grade scale based on the condition of nausea and vomiting: highly effective, moderately effective, slightly effective, and not effective. RESULTS: Patients treated with palonosetron showed significantly greater response rates than those receiving ondansetron during the both the acute and the delayed phases: highly and moderately effective: acute phase 15% versus 5% CARBOPEC; 70% versus 35% BEAM and 32% versus 20% BuCY; delayed phase: 60% versus 30% BuCY; 100% versus 50% BEAM and 25% versus 10% CARBOPEC. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose palonosetron was more effective than ondansetron treatment to prevent acute and delayed nausea and vomiting following HDC before HSCT.