Herrstedt Jørn, Muss Hyman B, Warr David G, Hesketh Paul J, Eisenberg Peter D, Raftopoulos Harry, Grunberg Steven M, Gabriel Munir, Rodgers Anthony, Hustad Carolyn M, Horgan Kevin J, Skobieranda Franck
Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.
Cancer. 2005 Oct 1;104(7):1548-55. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21343.
An aprepitant (APR) regimen was evaluated for prevention of nausea and emesis due to moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) over multiple cycles.
The authors performed a randomized, double-blind study. Eligible patients with breast carcinoma were naïve to emetogenic chemotherapy and treated with cyclophosphamide alone or with doxorubicin or epirubicin. Patients were randomized to receive either an APR regimen (Day 1: APR 125 mg, ondansetron [OND] 8 mg, and dexamethasone [DEX] 12 mg before chemotherapy and OND 8 mg 8 hrs later; Days 2-3: APR 80 mg every day) or a control regimen (Day 1: OND 8 mg and DEX 20 mg before chemotherapy and OND 8 mg 8 hrs later; Days 2-3: OND 8 mg twice per day). Data on nausea, emesis, and use of rescue medication were collected. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a complete response (CR; no emesis or use of rescue therapy) in Cycle 1. Efficacy end points for the multiple-cycle extension were the probabilities of a CR in Cycles 2-4 and a sustained CR rate across multiple cycles.
Of 866 patients randomized, 744 (85.9%) entered the multiple-cycle extension, and 650 (75.1%) completed all 4 cycles. Overall, the CR was greater with the APR regimen over the 4 cycles: 53.8% versus 39.4% for Cycle 2, 54.1% versus 39.3% for Cycle 3, and 55.0% versus 38.4% for Cycle 4. The cumulative percentage of patients with a sustained CR over all 4 cycles was greater with the APR regimen (P = 0.017).
The APR regimen was more effective than a control regimen for the prevention of nausea and emesis induced by MEC over multiple chemotherapy cycles.
评估了阿瑞匹坦(APR)方案在多个化疗周期中预防中度致吐性化疗(MEC)所致恶心和呕吐的效果。
作者进行了一项随机双盲研究。符合条件的乳腺癌患者未曾接受过致吐性化疗,接受环磷酰胺单药治疗或联合多柔比星或表柔比星治疗。患者被随机分为接受APR方案(第1天:化疗前给予APR 125 mg、昂丹司琼[OND] 8 mg和地塞米松[DEX] 12 mg,8小时后给予OND 8 mg;第2 - 3天:每天给予APR 80 mg)或对照方案(第1天:化疗前给予OND 8 mg和DEX 20 mg,8小时后给予OND 8 mg;第2 - 3天:每天给予OND 8 mg两次)。收集恶心、呕吐及使用解救药物的数据。主要终点是第1周期完全缓解(CR;无呕吐或未使用解救治疗)的患者比例。多周期延长阶段的疗效终点是第2 - 4周期CR的概率以及多个周期的持续CR率。
在随机分组的866例患者中,744例(85.9%)进入多周期延长阶段,650例(75.1%)完成了全部4个周期。总体而言,4个周期中APR方案的CR率更高:第2周期为53.8%对39.4%,第3周期为54.1%对39.3%,第4周期为55.0%对38.4%。APR方案在所有4个周期中持续CR的患者累积百分比更高(P = 0.017)。
在多个化疗周期中,APR方案在预防MEC所致恶心和呕吐方面比对照方案更有效。