de Wit R, Herrstedt J, Rapoport B, Carides A D, Guoguang-Ma J, Elmer M, Schmidt C, Evans J K, Horgan K J
Rotterdam Cancer Institute and Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 5201, 3008, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Feb;40(3):403-10.
In early clinical trials, the NK(1) receptor antagonist, aprepitant (EMEND(R)) was shown to improve the protection provided by the best available therapy (hereafter referred to as 'standard therapy': a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist and dexamethasone) against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting over multiple cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy. To further study the sustainment of antiemetic efficacy of aprepitant plus standard therapy over more than one cycle of chemotherapy, we examined combined data from the multiple cycles extensions of two phase III clinical trials of oral aprepitant plus standard therapy for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Data were pooled from two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with identical design and treatment regimens. Cancer patients receiving a first cycle of cisplatin-based (>or=70 mg/m(2)) chemotherapy were randomised to one of two treatment groups as follows: the standard therapy group received ondansetron 32 mg intravenously (i.v.) and dexamethasone 20 mg on day 1 and dexamethasone 8 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) on days 2-4. The aprepitant group received aprepitant 125 mg, ondansetron 32 mg i.v., and dexamethasone 12 mg on day 1, aprepitant 80 mg and dexamethasone 8 mg on days 2-3, and dexamethasone 8 mg on day 4. Patients had the option to receive the same blinded treatment for up to five additional cycles. The analysis used a combined exploratory endpoint of no emesis and no significant nausea (i.e. nausea which interfered with a patient's normal activities) over the 5 days following cisplatin, for up to six cycles of chemotherapy. A cumulative probabilities approach incorporating a model for transitional probabilities was used to analyse the data. Tolerability was assessed by reported adverse events and physical and laboratory assessments. Baseline characteristics, reasons for discontinuation, and drop-out rates were similar between groups. In every cycle, the estimated probabilities (rates) of no emesis and no significant nausea were significantly higher (P<0.006) in the aprepitant group: in the first cycle, rates were 61% in the aprepitant group (N=516) and 46% in the standard therapy group (N=522), and thereafter, rates for the aprepitant regimen remained higher throughout (59% (N=89) versus 40% (N=78) for the standard therapy, by cycle 6). Repeated dosing with aprepitant over multiple cycles was generally well tolerated. Compared with patients who received standard therapy alone (a 5-HT(3) antagonist plus dexamethasone), those who received aprepitant in addition to standard therapy had consistently better antiemetic protection that was well maintained over multiple cycles of highly emetogenic chemotherapy
在早期临床试验中,NK(1)受体拮抗剂阿瑞匹坦(商品名:意美®)显示出,在多周期基于顺铂的化疗过程中,相较于最佳可用疗法(以下简称“标准疗法”:一种5-HT(3)受体拮抗剂和地塞米松),其能增强对化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的防护作用。为进一步研究阿瑞匹坦联合标准疗法在超过一个化疗周期中的止吐疗效持续性,我们分析了两项口服阿瑞匹坦联合标准疗法预防化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的III期临床试验多周期扩展研究的合并数据。数据来自两项设计和治疗方案相同的多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究。接受首个周期基于顺铂(≥70mg/m²)化疗的癌症患者被随机分为以下两个治疗组之一:标准疗法组在第1天静脉注射32mg昂丹司琼和20mg地塞米松,在第2 - 4天每天两次口服8mg地塞米松。阿瑞匹坦组在第1天接受125mg阿瑞匹坦、32mg静脉注射昂丹司琼和12mg地塞米松,在第2 - 3天接受80mg阿瑞匹坦和8mg地塞米松,在第4天接受8mg地塞米松。患者可选择接受相同的盲法治疗,最多再进行五个周期。分析采用了一个联合探索性终点,即顺铂治疗后5天内无呕吐且无明显恶心(即干扰患者正常活动的恶心),化疗最多进行六个周期。采用一种纳入转移概率模型的累积概率方法对数据进行分析。通过报告的不良事件以及体格和实验室评估来评估耐受性。两组之间的基线特征、停药原因和脱落率相似。在每个周期中,阿瑞匹坦组无呕吐且无明显恶心的估计概率(发生率)显著更高(P<0.006):在第一个周期,阿瑞匹坦组发生率为61%(N = 516),标准疗法组为46%(N = 522),此后,阿瑞匹坦治疗方案的发生率在整个过程中一直更高(到第6周期时,阿瑞匹坦组为59%(N = 89),标准疗法组为40%(N = 78))。多周期重复给予阿瑞匹坦总体耐受性良好。与仅接受标准疗法(一种5-HT(3)拮抗剂加地塞米松)的患者相比,除标准疗法外还接受阿瑞匹坦治疗的患者在多周期高致吐性化疗中始终具有更好的止吐防护作用,且该作用能得到良好维持。