Department of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, Ordos 017000, China.
Department of Radiotherapy, Tong Liao City Hospital, Tong Liao 028000, China.
Int J Clin Pract. 2022 Sep 7;2022:5954379. doi: 10.1155/2022/5954379. eCollection 2022.
The significance of this article is to talk about aprepitant and olanzapine 5 mg, compare them, and deeply explore the safety or effectiveness during the whole process of multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy-induced vomiting and nausea.
This trial was randomized and prospective. It is needed to receive cisplatin chemotherapy (25 mg/m2/d) for three days. Its patients would need to choose to use 5 mg olanzapine or aprepitant for this treatment, combined with 5-HT3 receptor antagonist plus dexamethasone. The primary endpoints were the total protection (TP) during the acute phase (AP) (0-24 hours), delayed phase (DP) (25-120 hours), and overall phase (OP) (0-120 h) between the two groups. The secondary endpoints were the complete response (CR) and total control (TC) during the three phases. The first time of the whole process is particularly important and needs to be observed vigorously. However, the time of the patient's first vomiting symptom is also compared accurately by using the Kaplan-Meier curve. The functional life index vomiting (FLIE) was used to calculate and carefully evaluate the serious impact of nausea and vomiting (CINV) induced by the whole chemotherapy process on the quality of life. About olanzapine, its related symptoms and other side effects and aprepitant were also recorded.
(1) The primary endpoint TP rates of the olanzapine and aprepitant groups were similar; for the AP, they were 94.23% (98/104) vs. 95.45% (98/106) =0.61(=0.61); for the DP, they were 54.81% (57/104) vs. 54.72% (58/106) (=0.99), and for the OP, the values were 53.79% (58/105) and 55.31% (56/104), respectively (=0.99). The secondary endpoints, the TC rates, and CR rates were also comparable in the three phases ( > 0.05). (2) After research and display, the results showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups when they were used for the first time of vomiting and the FLIE index ( > 0.05). (3) The main olanzapine-related adverse event was drowsiness, while that of aprepitant was constipation.
The efficacy of 5 mg olanzapine was similar to that of aprepitant, and it also showed an advantageous economic potency ratio in preventing CINV induced by multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy with increased sedation side effects.
本文的意义在于探讨阿瑞匹坦和奥氮平 5mg，对它们进行比较，并深入探讨在顺铂化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的整个过程中，它们的安全性或有效性。
本试验为随机前瞻性试验，需接受顺铂化疗（25mg/m2/d）3 天，其患者需选择使用 5mg 奥氮平或阿瑞匹坦进行治疗，联合 5-HT3 受体拮抗剂加地塞米松。主要终点为两组在急性期（AP）（0-24 小时）、迟发性期（DP）（25-120 小时）和整个期（OP）（0-120 小时）的总保护（TP）。次要终点为三个阶段的完全缓解（CR）和总控制（TC）。整个过程的第一次非常重要，需要进行大力观察。然而，还通过使用 Kaplan-Meier 曲线准确比较了患者首次呕吐症状的时间。使用功能生命指数呕吐（FLIE）来计算并仔细评估整个化疗过程中恶心和呕吐（CINV）对生活质量的严重影响。关于奥氮平，还记录了其相关症状和其他副作用以及阿瑞匹坦。
（1）奥氮平组和阿瑞匹坦组的主要终点 TP 率相似；AP 时，分别为 94.23%（98/104）和 95.45%（98/106）=0.61（=0.61）；DP 时，分别为 54.81%（57/104）和 54.72%（58/106）（=0.99），OP 时，分别为 53.79%（58/105）和 55.31%（56/104）（=0.99）。三个阶段的次要终点 TC 率和 CR 率也相似（>0.05）。（2）研究和显示后，结果表明两组在首次呕吐和 FLIE 指数时无明显差异（>0.05）。（3）奥氮平的主要不良反应是嗜睡，而阿瑞匹坦的主要不良反应是便秘。
5mg 奥氮平的疗效与阿瑞匹坦相似，在预防多日顺铂化疗引起的 CINV 方面具有有利的经济效价比，且镇静副作用增加。
