Efficacy and safety of 5HT3RA, DEX, and NK1RA for the prevention of FOLFIRINOX-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with pancreatic cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX), a standard chemotherapy regimen for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), is expected to be associated with a higher risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Herein, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a three-drug combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3RA), dexamethasone (DEX), and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists (NK1RA) for the prevention of CINV during mFFX therapy. METHODS: This study enrolled patients with APC who received mFFX as initial therapy with a combination of 5HT3RA, DEX, and NK1RA as antiemetic prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate during cycle 1, which was defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication use during the overall period (0-120 h). Safety was also evaluated with a focus on hyperglycemia, which is a concern in patients with APC. RESULTS: Seventy patients were eligible for this retrospective analysis. The CR rate during the overall period was 51.4%. Significant nausea, defined as grade 2 or higher, peaked to 77.1% on days 4-5, but remained above 65% until day 7. Hyperglycemia occurred in 37.1% of patients, and 34.3% were grade 3 hyperglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: CINV induced by mFFX was poorly controlled even with prophylactic antiemetic therapy using 5HT3RA, DEX, and NK1RA, and was found to persist beyond 5 days. Enhanced antiemetic measures for mFFX are desirable. However, in patients with diabetes mellitus complications, sparing of steroids and glycemic control should be considered.

Emetogenicity and Risk Factors of Nausea and Vomiting in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving Trifluridine/Tipiracil and Bevacizumab Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Although combination chemotherapy with trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) and bevacizumab (BEV) is highly effective for metastatic unresectable colorectal cancer (mCRC), this combination chemotherapy often induces nausea and vomiting. To identify risk factors for nausea and vomiting, we investigated the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in mCRC patients treated with TAS-102 and BEV. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Study patients with mCRC received TAS-102 and BEV between March 2016 and December 2021. The status of nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic measures in each course were investigated, and factors involved in the occurrence of nausea and vomiting were analysed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Data from 57 patients were analysed. The incidence rates of nausea and vomiting during the overall period were 57.9% and 17.5%, respectively. Nausea and vomiting were frequent not only in the early courses but also after the sixth course. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the experience of nausea and vomiting in previous treatment with other agents was significantly associated with nausea and vomiting with TAS-102 and BEV. CONCLUSION: The experience of nausea and vomiting in previous treatment was associated with increased risk for nausea and vomiting in mCRC patients treated with TAS-102 and BEV.

Impact of First-Line FOLFIRINOX-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy on the Efficacy of Second-Line GnP in Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) and Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) are effective first-line chemotherapies for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC); however, both lead to peripheral neuropathy (PN). AIMS: To evaluate the impact of first-line mFFX-induced PN on the efficacy of second-line GnP in patients with APC. METHODS: A database containing patients with APC was retrospectively analyzed to evaluate patients who received second-line GnP after first-line mFFX failure between September 2014 and January 2021. The efficacy and safety of GnP were compared between patients with PN ≥ Grade 2 (PN group) and PN ≤ Grade 1 (non-PN group) at the start of second-line GnP. Cox proportional hazards analysis was also performed to examine the effect on overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment failure (TTF). RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (PN group, 18 patients; non-PN group, 41 patients) were included. Median OS and TTF in the PN versus non-PN group were 7.7 versus 5.7 months (p = 0.19) and 3.8 versus 2.7 months (p = 0.18), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that PN (≥Grade 2) was not a significant factor affecting either OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-1.31, p = 0.24) or TTF (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38-1.33, p = 0.28). No significant difference was observed in the relative dose intensity of GEM or nab-PTX, and incidence of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: mFFX-induced PN has little impact on the efficacy and safety of second-line GnP in patients with APC. Second-line GnP could be a possible treatment option regardless of the presence of PN.

Association Between Peripheral Neuropathy Induced by Oxaliplatin at First-line Chemotherapy and Efficacy of Paclitaxel at Second-line Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Although peripheral neuropathy (PN) is a common adverse event in patients treated with oxaliplatin as first-line chemotherapy (1st-OX) for advanced gastric cancer, the effect of PN on the efficacy of paclitaxel at second-line chemotherapy (2nd-PTX) remains unclear. We investigated the association between PN induced by 1st-OX and efficacy of 2nd-PTX in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study subjects were patients with AGC who received 1st-OX followed by 2nd-PTX at Gifu University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2019. Primary outcome was time to treatment failure (TTF) of 2nd-PTX. Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), response rate and adverse events during the period of 2nd-PTX. The association between incidence of grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (G2PN) and TTF or OS was also evaluated using Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients with AGC who received 1st-OX followed by 2nd-PTX were eligible. Incidence rates of G2PN at the start of 2nd-PTX was 20.3% (11/54). Median duration of TTF and OS were not significantly longer in patients with G2PN than in those without it (TTF: 4.7 months vs. 3.7 months, p=0.264, OS: 10.6 months vs. 8.5 months, p=0.706). Cox proportional hazards analysis indicated that there was no significant relationship between the incidence of G2PN and TTF, or between the incidence of G2PN and OS. However, development of grade ≥3 PN was significantly higher in patients with G2PN than in those without it (45.5% vs. 2.3%, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: G2PN induced by 1st-OX may not affect efficacy of 2nd-PTX in patients with AGC but could be a risk for grade ≥3 PN of 2nd-PTX.

Pharmaceutical intervention for adverse events improves quality of life in patients with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The effect of pharmaceutical intervention to treat adverse events on quality of life (QOL) in outpatients receiving cancer chemotherapy is unclear. We investigated whether pharmaceutical intervention provided by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians improves QOL with outpatient cancer chemotherapy. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective descriptive study of pharmaceutical intervention for patients receiving outpatient cancer chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and July 2020. We assessed patient QOL using the Japanese version of the EuroQol 5 Dimension5 Level (EQ-5D-5L). Adverse events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. We compared the EQ-5D-5L utility value and incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events before and after pharmaceutical intervention. RESULTS: Our analysis included 151 patients who underwent 210 chemotherapy cycles. Pharmaceutical intervention significantly improved patients' EQ-5D-5L utility values from 0.8197 to 0.8603 (P < 0.01). EQ-5D-5L utility values were significantly improved after pharmaceutical intervention for nausea and vomiting (pre-intervention 0.8145, post-intervention 0.8603, P = 0.016), peripheral neuropathy (pre-intervention 0.7798, post-intervention 0.7988, P = 0.032) and pain (pre-intervention 0.7625, post-intervention 0.8197, P = 0.035). Although not statistically significant, the incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, dermopathy, pain, oral mucositis, diarrhea and dysgeusia, tended to be lower post-intervention than pre-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmaceutical intervention by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians may improve QOL in patients undergoing outpatient cancer chemotherapy.

Anorexia, pain and peripheral neuropathy are associated with a decrease in quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving outpatient chemotherapy - a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer chemotherapy usually improves clinical outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), but can also cause moderate-to-severe adverse events (AEs). We investigated the relationship between moderate-to-severe AEs and quality of life (QOL) in patients with APC who received outpatient chemotherapy. METHODS: We recruited APC patients who received outpatient chemotherapy in Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and December 2018. Adverse events related to chemotherapy were assessed by a pharmacist collaborating with a physician using common terminology criteria for AEs (CTCAE) ver 4.0, and QOL of patients was self-assessed by patients using the five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L Japanese edition 2). Associations between the EQ-5D-5L utility value and serious AEs were assessed using proportional odds logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients who received 475 chemotherapy cycles were included. The proportional odds logistic regression indicated that grade ≥ 2 anorexia, pain and peripheral neuropathy were significantly correlated with a decreased EQ-5D-5L utility value. Pharmaceutical intervention for these AEs significantly improved the patients' EQ-5D-5L utility value. CONCLUSIONS: Anorexia, pain and peripheral neuropathy were significantly associated with a decrease in QOL. It is assumed that appropriate pharmaceutical intervention with particular emphasis on these AEs can improve the QOL of pancreatic cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy.

Comparison of Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting Between Gemcitabine Plus Nab-paclitaxel Combination Chemotherapy and Gemcitabine Monotherapy in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To clarify the risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with GnP therapy, gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (nab-PTX), we compared CINV between GEM and GnP therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who had received an initial course of GEM and GnP therapy were enrolled. Primary endpoint was the incidence of nausea, and secondary endpoints were the incidence of vomiting and rescue. In addition, the association between nausea and combination therapy with GEM and nab-PTX was evaluated by multivariate logistic regression with adjustment for covariates. All patients received anti-cancer drugs under guideline-consistent, low-risk antiemetic measures. RESULTS: Data from 105 patients were analyzed (GEM group, 44 patients; GnP group, 61 patients). The incidence of nausea, vomiting, and rescue did not significantly differ between the two groups during the acute, delayed or overall periods. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that combination therapy with GEM and nab-PTX was not significantly associated with nausea compared to GEM alone. CONCLUSION: Under guideline-consistent, low-risk antiemetic measures, GnP therapy-induced nausea and vomiting can be controlled similarly to when induced by GEM.