Association of amisulpride and recovery room length of stay among patients with postoperative nausea and vomiting following outpatient surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common sequela of surgery in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Amisulpride has shown promise in its ability to treat PONV. The objective of this study was to determine if amisulpride is associated with significant changes in PACU efficiency within a fast-paced ambulatory surgery center. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 816 patients at a single ambulatory surgery center who experienced PONV between 2018 and 2023. The two cohorts analyzed were patients who did or did not have amisulpride among their anti-emetic regimens in the PACU during two distinct time periods (before and after amisulpride was introduced). The primary outcome of the study was PACU length of stay. Both unmatched analysis and a linear multivariable mixed-effects model fit by restricted maximum likelihood (random effect being surgical procedure) were used to analyze the association between amisulpride and PACU length of stay. We performed segmented regression to account for cohorts occurring during two time periods. RESULTS: Unmatched univariate analysis revealed no significant difference in PACU length of stay (minutes) between the amisulpride and no amisulpride cohorts (115 min vs 119 min, respectively; P = 0.07). However, when addressing confounders by means of the mixed-effects multivariable segmented regression, the amisulpride cohort was associated with a statistically significant reduction in PACU length of stay by 26.1 min (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that amisulpride was associated with a significant decrease in PACU length of stay among patients with PONV in a single outpatient surgery center. The downstream cost-savings and operational efficiency gained from this drug's implementation may serve as a useful lens through which this drug's widespread implementation may further be rationalized.

Evaluation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients with high-grade glioma treated with lomustine-a case series.

PURPOSE: Although lomustine has been used as a chemotherapeutic agent for decades, no recommendation on appropriate chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis is available. As CINV is considered one of the most bothersome side effects of chemotherapy, adequate prophylaxis is of relevance to improve quality of life during cancer treatment. The aim of this retrospective case series was to report the incidence and severity of CINV in pediatric patients with high-grade glioma treated with lomustine and to formulate recommendations for appropriate CINV prophylaxis. METHODS: Pediatric patients treated with lomustine for high-grade glioma according to the ACNS 0423 protocol were identified retrospectively. Two researchers independently reviewed and classified complaints of CINV and administered CINV prophylaxis. Treatment details, tumor localization, and response to therapy were systematically extracted from the patients' files. RESULTS: Seventeen children aged 8-18 years received a median of four cycles of lomustine. CINV complaints and administered prophylaxis were evaluable in all patients. Moderate or severe CINV was observed in 13/17 (76%) patients. Administered prophylactic CINV regimens varied from no prophylaxis to triple-agent combinations. CONCLUSION: In this case series, we identified lomustine as a highly emetogenic chemotherapeutic agent. According to the current guidelines, CINV prophylaxis with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist in combination with dexamethasone and (fos)aprepitant is recommended.

Screening study of anti-emetics to improve GDF15-induced malaise and anorexia: Implications for emesis control.

Considerable preclinical and clinical attention has focused on the food intake and body weight suppressive effects of growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) and its elevated blood levels as a consequence of disease states and disease treatment therapeutics. We have previously reported that exogenous administration of GDF15 induces anorexia through nausea and emesis in multiple species. Importantly, GDF15 signaling as a meditator of chemotherapy-induced anorexia and emesis has recently been demonstrated in both murine and nonhuman primate models. The mechanism, however, by which GDF15 induces malaise and the utility of existing therapeutic targets to counteract its effects remain largely unknown. Using a dose of GDF15 that mimics stimulated levels following chemotherapy administration and reliably induces malaise, we sought to screen anti-emetics that represent distinct pharmacotherapeutic classes hypothesized to reduce GDF15-induced effects in rats. Strikingly, our results showed that none of the tested compounds were effective at preventing GDF15-induced malaise. These results illustrate the complexity of GDF15 signaling mechanism and may have important implications for medical conditions characterized by elevated GDF15 levels and incomplete symptom control, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Addressing adherence to guidelines on prevention of acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a distressing adverse effect in children receiving cancer treatment. There are evidence-based pediatric clinical practice guidelines (CPG) on chemotherapy emetogenicity and acute CINV prevention, but adherence to these guidelines is low. PROCEDURE: A quality improvement-based study was conducted at McMaster Children's Hospital. The SMART aim was to increase adherence to guidelines on prevention of acute CINV in hospitalized patients receiving high (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) from baseline 25% to more than 70% by June 2021. Barriers were identified by process mapping, and a series of interventions were implemented. RESULTS: Guideline adherence was assessed in 270 inpatient chemotherapy administrations (HEC, MEC). Data were collected on 131 charts pre interventions and 139 charts post interventions. Interventions included education, addition of guideline-recommended anti-emetics to the inpatient formulary, and implementation of a standardized CPG tool. Initial rates of total CINV guideline adherence were 25%, which improved to 72% post intervention (p < .001). In subgroup analysis, guideline adherence in the MEC group improved from 13% to 34% (p = .015), and in the HEC group from 32% to 93% (p < .001). The most common reason for nonadherence in the HEC group was failure to use aprepitant as anti-emetic, and in MEC was option for ondansetron monotherapy prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Using quality improvement methodology, barriers to guideline adherence were identified and interventions implemented. Guideline adherence for prevention of CINV improved, particularly in the HEC group but less for the MEC group. Future steps will include sustainability of interventions and addressing adherence in the MEC group.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of aprepitant-based anti-emetic regimen for children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: Individual patient data analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Aprepitant has been shown to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In this study, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant for children receiving HEC in India, United Kingdom, and the United States. PROCEDURE: We utilized individual patient-level outcome data from a pediatric randomized trial, which demonstrated the superiority of an aprepitant-based anti-emetic prophylaxis over standard ondansetron and dexamethasone for HEC. Health state for each day of follow-up was analyzed and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net monetary benefit (NMB) for each country were estimated. Sensitivity analyses by varying cost of aprepitant, hospitalization, and health state utility values by ±25% were conducted. RESULTS: Use of the aprepitant-based regimen resulted in gain of 0.0019 QALY per chemotherapy cycle along with cost savings of $22.25, $1335.52, and $6612.10 for India, United Kingdom, and the United States, respectively. The cost savings per QALY was estimated to be $12,355.84 for India, $734,282.90 for the United Kingdom, and $3,567,564.11 for the United States. The cost savings for 50% gain in the percentage of days without grade 3 vomiting was $124.18 for India, $7451.63 for the United Kingdom, and $36,892.76 for the United States. The NMB for gain in QALY was $33.62, $1418.60, and $6727.01 for India, United Kingdom, and the United States, respectively. The estimates remained cost-effective across all scenarios of the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Aprepitant-based anti-emetic regimen is cost-effective for children receiving HEC. It results in overall cost savings and reduced healthcare-resource utilization.

Olfactory Distraction for Management of Nausea in Palliative Care Patients.

Nausea is one of the most common and debilitating symptoms Palliative Care patients experience. This can be caused by the life-limiting illness itself, its complications, or its treatments. While there are many options for management, including anti-emetics and motility agents, patients may develop refractory nausea or even intolerance to these treatments. Drug interactions, sedation, extrapyramidal effects, serotonin syndrome, and prolonged QT intervals with risk factors for Torsades de Pointes may all preclude use of these medications. Olfactory distraction using alcohol swabs has supporting literature in the emergency care setting as a means of alleviating nausea in a safe and effective way. We present a case series of 3 patients admitted to a Northwell facility who were referred to the Palliative Care consult service for severe nausea. The patients had nausea of varying etiology and were successfully managed with inhalation of alcohol swabs. This is the first case series that looks into applying this intervention to the Palliative Care population as an easy-to-use, readily-available, and safe method to manage nausea.

Real-world multicenter study of the safety and efficacy of netupitant plus palonosetron fixed-dose combination to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among Malaysian patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

AIM: A large proportion of cancer patients are at high risk for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), but the choice of anti-emetics for CINV in Malaysia is limited. METHODS: This was a real-world study of a fixed-dose combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) to inhibit CINV in adult patients receiving moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) for solid/hematological malignancies at eight Malaysian centers. Each HEC/MEC cycle received one dose of NEPA + dexamethasone for CINV prevention. Complete response (no emesis, no rescue medication) (CR), no more than mild nausea (severity score ≤ 2.5), and complete control (CR) (no more than mild nausea) during the acute (0-24 h), delayed (25-120 h), and overall (0-120 h) phases post-chemotherapy were measured. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded. RESULTS: During March 2016-April 2018 (NMRR-17-3286-38282), NEPA + dexamethasone was administered to 54 patients (77.8% solid, 22.2% hematological malignancies). Note that 59.3% received HEC, while 40.7% received MEC regimen. During the overall phase of the first cycle, the majority had CR (77.8%), no more than mild nausea (74.1%), and complete control (61.1%). Seventeen patients received two consecutive cycles at any point of chemotherapy cycles. During the overall phases across two consecutive cycles, all patients achieved CR, and the majority reported no more than mild nausea and complete control. No grades 3-4 AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: NEPA had sustained efficacy and tolerability at first administration and across two cycles of MEC/HEC for CINV prevention.

Strategies to Mitigate Chemotherapy and Radiation Toxicities That Affect Eating.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and its therapy is commonly associated with a variety of side effects that impact eating behaviors that reduce nutritional intake. This review will outline potential causes of chemotherapy and radiation damage as well as approaches for the amelioration of the side effects of cancer during therapy. METHODS: Information for clinicians, patients, and their caregivers about toxicity mitigation including nausea reduction, damage to epithelial structures such as skin and mucosa, organ toxicity, and education is reviewed. RESULTS: How to anticipate, reduce, and prevent some toxicities encountered during chemotherapy and radiation is detailed with the goal to improve eating behaviors. Strategies for health care professionals, caregivers, and patients to consider include (a) the reduction in nausea and vomiting, (b) decreasing damage to the mucosa, (c) avoiding a catabolic state and muscle wasting (sarcopenia), and (d) developing therapeutic alliances with patients, caregivers, and oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Although the reduction of side effects involves anticipatory guidance and proactive team effort (e.g., forward observation, electronic interactions, patient reported outcomes), toxicity reduction can be satisfying for not only the patient, but everyone involved in cancer care.

Enteric Fever: Diagnostic Dilemma Encountered in Domperidone-Induced Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome.

Enteric fever is a multisystem illness caused by Salmonella Typhi and Salmonella Paratyphi, and it is associated with a spectrum of conditions ranging from minor cases of diarrhea and low-grade fever to a potentially fatal illness that can lead to gastrointestinal (GI) perforation, hemorrhage, central nervous system (CNS) involvement. Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) is predominantly described as an idiosyncratic reaction to neuroleptic medications. However, it has also been associated with a variety of drugs that reduce dopaminergic activity. In this report, we present the case of a young woman who had enteric fever and was prescribed IV ceftriaxone and domperidone. She subsequently developed NMS secondary to domperidone. We highlight the challenges faced when dealing with two potentially lethal medical conditions presenting concurrently and their overlapping symptoms. The patient was treated for both of the conditions and recovered completely.

Construction of a Risk Prediction Model of Extended Release Oxycodone Tablet-Induced Nausea and Clarification of Predictive Factors.

Nausea is a typical adverse event associated with opioids. In this study, we performed logistic regression analysis with the aim of clarifying the risk factors for nausea induced by extended-release oxycodone (ER-OXY). Furthermore, we constructed a decision tree (DT) model, a typical data mining method, to estimate the risk of oxycodone-induced nausea by combining multiple factors. A retrospective study was conducted on patients who newly received ER-OXY for cancer pain during hospitalization at Hokkaido University Hospital in Japan from April 2015 to March 2018. In logistic regression and DT analyses, the dependent variable was the presence or absence of nausea. Independent variables were the potential risk factors. First, univariate analyses were performed to screen potential factors associated with oxycodone-induced nausea. Then, multivariate and DT analyses were performed using factors with p-values <0.1 in the univariate analysis. Of 267 cases included in this study, nausea was observed in 30.3% (81/267). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, only female sex was extracted as an independent factor affecting nausea (odds ratio, 1.98). In the DT analysis, we additionally revealed that an age <50 years was a risk factor for nausea in female patients. Thus, our DT model indicated that the risk of ER-OXY-induced nausea was highest in the subgroup comprising females <50 years of age (66.7%) and lowest in male patients (25.1%). The DT model suggested that the factor of young women may be an increased risk of ER-OXY-induced nausea.

Effect of Prophylactic Anti-emetics on Opioid-induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The guidelines on pharmacotherapy for cancer-related pain advocate active measures against the adverse effects of opioids to increase adherence to medication. However, preventative therapy for the management of nausea and vomiting has not been specified. This study aimed to verify the effects of prophylactic anti-emetics in preventing opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of cases at our hospital in which oral opioids or patches were initiated for the management of pain due to malignant tumours from January 2017 to September 2019. RESULTS: Strong opioids were initiated for 349 patients; of these, data for 298 patients were analysed. A total of 193 patients were on anti-emetic prophylaxis. We found that the group that did not receive anti-emetic prophylaxis was significantly more likely to be prescribed an additional anti-emetic. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic administration of anti-emetics at the time of initiating opioid analgesics may reduce gastrointestinal toxicity.

Medical treatment for acute renal colic. / Tratamiento médico del cólico renoureteral en su fase aguda.

INTRODUCTION: Renoureteral colic (CRU) is the most common urological emergency, with a wide spectrum of severity that generates high morbidity and high health costs. However, there is no homogeneous scheme of pharmacological treatment in its acutephase. AIMS: The main objective of our work is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of the different drugs used in the treatment of CCR and to propose a practical treatment scheme. The secondary objectives are to evaluate the role of fluid therapy in CRU and the treatment of CRU in pregnant women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We have carried out a literature search on PubMed using the MeSH terms "renalcolic", "treatment", "anti-inflammatory drugs", "antiemeticdrugs", "fluid therapy" and "pregnant". The most relevant clinical trials, meta-analyses and systematic reviews published from 1 January 2005 to 15 September 2020 in Spanish, English and French were reviewed. RESULTS: In the different studies reviewed, non-steroidalanti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) show better pain control, with lower rescue doses and fewer side effects than treatment with opioids. However, fluid therapy has failed to demonstrate an impact on the treatment of CRU. CONCLUSIONS: The initial treatment for CRU is NSAIDs, reserving opioids for successive treatment lines. The control of vegetative cortex can be accomplished with Ondansetron as first choice.

INTRODUCCIÓN: El cólico renoureteral (CRU) es la urgencia urológica más frecuente, con un amplio espectro de gravedad que genera una alta morbilidad y elevados costes sanitarios. Sin embargo, no existe un esquema homogéneo de tratamiento farmacológico en su fase aguda. OBJETIVOS: El objetivo principal de nuestro trabajo es evaluar la efectividad y perfil de seguridad de los distintos fármacos empleados en el tratamiento del CRU y proponer un esquema práctico de tratamiento. Los objetivos secundarios son evaluar el papel de la fluidoterapia en el CRU y el tratamiento del CRU en embarazadas.MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Hemos realizado una búsqueda bibliográfica en PubMed utilizando los términos MeSH "renal colic", "treatment", "anti-inflammatory- drugs", "antiemetic drugs", "fluid therapy" y "pregnant". Se revisaron ensayos clínicos, metaanálisis y revisiones sistemáticas de mayor relevancia, publicados desde el 1 de enero de 2005 hasta el 15 de septiembre de 2020, escritos en lengua española, inglesa y francesa. RESULTADOS: En los diferentes estudios revisados los antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINES) muestran un mejor control del dolor, con menores dosis de rescate y menos efectos secundarios que el tratamiento con opioides. Sin embargo, la fluidoterapia no ha logrado demostrar una repercusión en el tratamiento del CRU. CONCLUSIONES: El tratamiento de primera elección para el CRU son los AINES, reservando los opioides para sucesivas líneas de tratamiento. El control del cortejo vegetativo se puede realizar con ondansetrón comoprimera elección.

Management of migraine in the emergency department: Findings from the 2010-2017 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to describe trends in the medical management of migraine in the emergency department (ED) using the 2010-2017 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) datasets. METHODS: Using the 2010-2017 NHAMCS datasets, we analyzed visits with a discharge diagnosis of migraine. Drug prescription frequencies between years were compared with the Rao-Scott chi-squared test. Adjusted odds ratios of opioid administration from 2010 to 2017 were calculated using weighted multivariable logistic regression with sex, age, race/ethnicity, pain-score, primary expected source of payment, and year as predictor variables. RESULTS: Our analysis captured 1846 ED visits with a diagnosis of migraine from 2010 to 2017, representing a weighted average of 1.2 million US ED visits per year. Parenteral opioids were prescribed in 49% (95% CI: 40, 58) of visits in 2010 and 28% (95% CI: 15, 45) of visits in 2017 (p = 0.03). From 2010 to 2017, there was a 10% yearly decrease in opioid prescriptions. Metoclopramide and ketorolac were prescribed more frequently in years 2015 through 2017 than in 2010. Increased opioid administration was associated with female sex, older age, white race, higher pain score, and having Medicare or private insurance as the primary expected source of payment for all years. CONCLUSION: Opioid administration for migraine in EDs across the US declined 10% annually between 2010 and 2017, demonstrating improved adherence to migraine guidelines recommending against opioids. We identified several factors associated with opioid administration for migraine, identifying groups at higher risk for unnecessary opioids in the ED setting.

The evolution of anti-emetic prescriptions in primary care, between 2006 and 2016.

CONTEXT: Serious adverse events related to the use of domperidone and metoclopramide have been consistently reported in the literature for many years. This led to a restriction of their use in the early 2010s. OBJECTIVE: The main objective was to analyse the evolution of antiemetic prescription rate in French general practise between 2006 and 2016. The secondary objectives were to highlight prescription transfers for metopimazine and to quantify the impact on health expenditures. METHOD: All patients from a representative sample of a national administrative claims database, the French national health insurance database, were included between 2006 and 2016. Trends in annual anti-emetic prescription rates by general practitioners were analysed using logistic regression models adjusted for age, gender and the existence of cancer. The cost of theses changing prescription habits was quantified via Médic'AM, a public drug expenditure database. RESULTS: Around 669 020 individuals were included with a mean 8-year follow-up; 48 634 patients received an anti-emetic at least once between 2006 and 2016. Prescription rates for all antiemetics decreased significantly from 2.1% to 0.4%, especially for metoclopramide from 0.5% to 0.1%, for domperidone from 1.5% to 0.1% and for metopimazine from 0.4% to 0.2%, which is not in favour of prescription transfers. Expenses fell from 30 million euros in 2006 to 10 million in 2016. CONCLUSION: Decreases in anti-emetic prescription rates and public health expenditures preceded the publication of official recommendations to reduce the use of metoclopramide and domperidone, without prescription transfers for metopimazine.

Extended release granisetron: Review of pharmacologic considerations and clinical role in the perioperative setting.

In this review, we evaluate recent literature on use of ER granisetron in clinical practice as compared with current antiemetics and describe its potential uses for perioperative PONV prophylaxis and treatment. Recent literature was evaluated on ER granisetron use compared with currently used antiemetic agents ondansetron, droperidol, metoclopramide, promethazine, and dexamethasone with a focus on procedural anti-emesis. Though promising great effect, application of extended release granisetron to clinical use may be limited by it's increased relative cost.

Drugs for preventing post-operative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different categories of drugs are used to reduce the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study is a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials with such drugs. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for appropriate randomized clinical trials evaluating drugs reducing PONV in LC. Number of patients without PONV at 24 h was the primary outcome; and incidence of nausea and/or vomiting at 6 h and 24 h, and adverse events were the secondary outcome measures. Risk of bias was evaluated for each study. Mixed treatment comparison estimates were derived by random-effects modelling. Trial sequential analysis was carried out to assess the adequacy of evidence; and surface area under cumulative ranking curve was generated to identify the best intervention in the pool. Grading of the evidence for key comparisons was done. RESULTS: Ninety clinical trials were included. Metoclopramide, gabapentin, dixyrazine, ondansetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, tropisetron, droperidol, droperidol/dexamethasone, droperidol/metoclopramide, granisetron/droperidol and granisetron/dexamethasone, haloperidol, dexmedetomidine, palonosetron, droperidol/ondansetron, metoclopramide/dexamethasone, haloperidol/ondansetron, haloperidol/dexamethasone, palonosetron/dexamethasone and ramosetron/dexamethasone were observed with significant benefits compared to placebo. Corticosteroid/serotonin receptor antagonists was observed with the highest probability of being the 'best' in this pool. However, the moderate quality of evidence obtained was adequate to confirm the benefits of dexamethasone and ondansetron only. CONCLUSION: The relative effect sizes for various prophylactic anti-emetics for LC was modelled using the principles of network meta-analysis. Dexamethasone and ondansetron have the best evidence as stand-alone options and the combination is preferred in high-risk category. Caution should be exercised while interpreting the evidence as the estimates might change with head-to-head clinical trial data.

A phase II open-label study of aprepitant as anti-emetic prophylaxis in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) undergoing induction chemotherapy.

Despite the widespread use of 5-HT3 antagonists as anti-emetic prophylaxis in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving induction chemotherapy, nausea and vomiting persist in many cases. We performed a Phase II single-arm study evaluating the use of aprepitant on days 1-5, in combination with a 5-HT antagonist on days 1-3, in AML patients undergoing induction chemotherapy with daunorubicin on days 1-3 plus cytarabine, given as a continuous infusion, on days 1-7. This was compared to a retrospective cohort of AML patients that received the same chemotherapy regimen with a 5-HT antagonist but without aprepitant. The cumulative incidence of vomiting/retching by the end of day 5 was significantly lower in the aprepitant vs. the control group (26.3 vs. 52.8%, p = 0.013). The cumulative incidence of nausea by the end of day 5 was 61% in the aprepitant group vs. 75% in the control group. The total use of supplemental anti-emetics on days 2-5 was also significantly lower in the aprepitant group (p = 0.01). In contrast, the cumulative incidence of vomiting/retching by the end of day 8, the incidence of vomiting/retching on days 6-8, and the use of anti-emetics on days 6-8, were not significantly different between the two groups. The results suggest that the use of aprepitant may be associated with a lower rate of emesis during aprepitant dosing days, but not afterward. However, this requires confirmation in a randomized trial.

Aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in paediatric subjects: An analysis by age group.

BACKGROUND: This was a subgroup analysis of age group, dexamethasone use, and very highly emetogenic chemotherapy (VHEC) use from a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, Phase 3 study of oral aprepitant in paediatric subjects. METHODS: Subjects aged 6 months to 17 years scheduled to receive chemotherapeutic agents associated with at least moderate risk for emesis were randomly assigned to receive either aprepitant plus ondansetron (aprepitant regimen) or placebo plus ondansetron (control regimen); both could be administered with or without dexamethasone. This secondary analysis evaluated subjects stratified by pre-specified age groups, dexamethasone use, and VHEC use. The primary endpoint of this analysis was the proportion of subjects who experienced complete response (CR) during the delayed phase. RESULTS: CR rates in the delayed phase were numerically higher with the aprepitant than the control regimen across all age categories, and reached significance for subjects aged 12-17 years (51% vs. 10%; P < 0.0001). In subjects receiving dexamethasone, CR was twice as high for the aprepitant versus control regimen in the 6 months to <2 year group (50% vs. 25%) and significantly higher in the 12-17 year group (40% vs. 7%, P < 0.05). CR was also significantly higher with aprepitant in the 6 months to <2 year and 12-17 year age groups who received VHEC. Similar proportions of subjects experiencing at least one adverse event were seen in both regimens across age categories. CONCLUSION: A 3 day aprepitant regimen seemed effective and safe for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in paediatric subjects across subgroups (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01362530).