Sarma Indrani Devi, Buragohain Sukainnya, Lahon Joonmoni, Bhagawati Indrani, Mahanta Neelakshi, Saikia Dibyajyoti
Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS Guwahati, Changsari, Assam, India.
Department of Pharmacology, Nalbari Medical College and Hospital, Assam, India.
Acta Med Litu. 2025;32(1):118-119. doi: 10.15388/Amed.2025.32.1.22. Epub 2025 Feb 18.
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant concern for patients undergoing highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). This study compares the efficacy of aprepitant and olanzapine in preventing CINV in breast cancer patients receiving Adriamycin and Cyclophosphamide (AC).
A prospective, comparative, observational study was conducted over one year at the State Cancer Institute, Guwahati, India. 103 chemotherapy-naïve breast cancer patients were enrolled and divided into two groups: aprepitant and olanzapine, both receiving standard therapy with ondansetron and dexamethasone. CINV outcomes were assessed using the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Antiemesis Tool over five days post-chemotherapy. Acute (0-24 hours) and delayed (24-120 hours) nausea and vomiting were evaluated. Side effects were documented and compared between groups.
Olanzapine demonstrated significantly better control of acute nausea compared to aprepitant ( < 0.05). It also showed a trend towards superior efficacy in delayed nausea, though statistical significance was not reached. There was no significant difference between aprepitant and olanzapine in preventing acute or delayed vomiting. The olanzapine group experienced more frequent side effects, but the difference was statistically insignificant.
Olanzapine exhibited greater efficacy in preventing nausea, particularly in the acute phase, compared to aprepitant. However, its higher side effect profile suggests that careful patient selection is necessary. Both agents remain effective options for CINV management, with olanzapine offering an advantage in nausea prevention.
化疗引起的恶心和呕吐(CINV)是接受高致吐性化疗(HEC)患者的一个重大问题。本研究比较了阿瑞匹坦和奥氮平在预防接受阿霉素和环磷酰胺(AC)治疗的乳腺癌患者CINV方面的疗效。
在印度古瓦哈蒂的国家癌症研究所进行了一项为期一年的前瞻性、比较性观察研究。103例未经化疗的乳腺癌患者入组并分为两组:阿瑞匹坦组和奥氮平组,两组均接受昂丹司琼和地塞米松的标准治疗。化疗后五天使用多国支持性癌症护理协会(MASCC)止吐工具评估CINV结果。评估急性(0 - 24小时)和延迟(24 - 120小时)恶心和呕吐情况。记录并比较两组的副作用。
与阿瑞匹坦相比,奥氮平在控制急性恶心方面表现出显著更好的效果(<0.05)。在延迟性恶心方面,它也显示出疗效更优的趋势,尽管未达到统计学显著性。阿瑞匹坦和奥氮平在预防急性或延迟性呕吐方面没有显著差异。奥氮平组副作用更频繁,但差异无统计学意义。
与阿瑞匹坦相比,奥氮平在预防恶心方面,尤其是在急性期,表现出更大的疗效。然而,其较高的副作用表明需要仔细选择患者。两种药物仍然是CINV管理的有效选择,奥氮平在预防恶心方面具有优势。