Cargando…

Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)

INTRODUCTION: We describe the results of an exploratory analysis performed on the first head-to-head study (JapicCTI-194611) comparing two different intravenous (IV) neurokinin 1 (NK(1)) receptor antagonists, fosnetupitant and fosaprepitant, in combination with palonosetron (PALO) and dexamethasone...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hata, Akito, Shiraishi, Yoshimasa, Inui, Naoki, Okada, Morihito, Morise, Masahiro, Akiyoshi, Kohei, Takeda, Masayuki, Watanabe, Yasutaka, Sugawara, Shunichi, Shinagawa, Naofumi, Kubota, Kaoru, Saeki, Toshiaki, Tamura, Tomohide
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9098704/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2
_version_ 1784706438426263552
author Hata, Akito
Shiraishi, Yoshimasa
Inui, Naoki
Okada, Morihito
Morise, Masahiro
Akiyoshi, Kohei
Takeda, Masayuki
Watanabe, Yasutaka
Sugawara, Shunichi
Shinagawa, Naofumi
Kubota, Kaoru
Saeki, Toshiaki
Tamura, Tomohide
author_facet Hata, Akito
Shiraishi, Yoshimasa
Inui, Naoki
Okada, Morihito
Morise, Masahiro
Akiyoshi, Kohei
Takeda, Masayuki
Watanabe, Yasutaka
Sugawara, Shunichi
Shinagawa, Naofumi
Kubota, Kaoru
Saeki, Toshiaki
Tamura, Tomohide
author_sort Hata, Akito
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: We describe the results of an exploratory analysis performed on the first head-to-head study (JapicCTI-194611) comparing two different intravenous (IV) neurokinin 1 (NK(1)) receptor antagonists, fosnetupitant and fosaprepitant, in combination with palonosetron (PALO) and dexamethasone (DEX) for the prevention of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This analysis was performed to validate the findings of the primary analysis (previously published) utilizing a last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach for missing values for the efficacy endpoint of complete response (no emetic event and no rescue medication), while also evaluating the time periods encompassing the 0–168-hour (h) “extended overall phase” interval. METHODS: Patients scheduled to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to fosnetupitant 235 mg or fosaprepitant 150 mg in combination with PALO 0.75 mg and DEX. Complete response rates were calculated and compared (stratified by age category and sex with a Mantel–Haenszel test) during the study’s primary overall phase (0–120 h) and during additional time intervals of interest [acute (0–24 h), delayed (24–120 h), extended delayed (> 24–168 h), beyond delayed (120–168 h), and extended overall (0–168 h)]. RESULTS: A total of 785 patients were included (fosnetupitant N = 392, fosaprepitant N = 393). Complete response rates were numerically higher for fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant for all time intervals and statistically significant for the extended overall phase. Complete response rates for fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant during the overall, acute, delayed, extended delayed, beyond delayed, and extended overall phases were 75.5% vs. 71.0% (p = 0.1530), 93.9% vs. 92.6% (p = 0.4832), 77.0% vs. 72.8% (p = 0.1682), 74.7% vs. 68.4% (p = 0.0506), 86.7% vs. 81.7% (p = 0.0523), and 73.5% vs. 66.9% (p = 0.0450), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this exploratory analysis, fosnetupitant appeared to be more effective than fosaprepitant in preventing CINV associated with cisplatin-based HEC during the extended 7-day period following chemotherapy. INFOGRAPHIC: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9098704
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90987042022-05-14 Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE) Hata, Akito Shiraishi, Yoshimasa Inui, Naoki Okada, Morihito Morise, Masahiro Akiyoshi, Kohei Takeda, Masayuki Watanabe, Yasutaka Sugawara, Shunichi Shinagawa, Naofumi Kubota, Kaoru Saeki, Toshiaki Tamura, Tomohide Oncol Ther Brief Report INTRODUCTION: We describe the results of an exploratory analysis performed on the first head-to-head study (JapicCTI-194611) comparing two different intravenous (IV) neurokinin 1 (NK(1)) receptor antagonists, fosnetupitant and fosaprepitant, in combination with palonosetron (PALO) and dexamethasone (DEX) for the prevention of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This analysis was performed to validate the findings of the primary analysis (previously published) utilizing a last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach for missing values for the efficacy endpoint of complete response (no emetic event and no rescue medication), while also evaluating the time periods encompassing the 0–168-hour (h) “extended overall phase” interval. METHODS: Patients scheduled to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to fosnetupitant 235 mg or fosaprepitant 150 mg in combination with PALO 0.75 mg and DEX. Complete response rates were calculated and compared (stratified by age category and sex with a Mantel–Haenszel test) during the study’s primary overall phase (0–120 h) and during additional time intervals of interest [acute (0–24 h), delayed (24–120 h), extended delayed (> 24–168 h), beyond delayed (120–168 h), and extended overall (0–168 h)]. RESULTS: A total of 785 patients were included (fosnetupitant N = 392, fosaprepitant N = 393). Complete response rates were numerically higher for fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant for all time intervals and statistically significant for the extended overall phase. Complete response rates for fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant during the overall, acute, delayed, extended delayed, beyond delayed, and extended overall phases were 75.5% vs. 71.0% (p = 0.1530), 93.9% vs. 92.6% (p = 0.4832), 77.0% vs. 72.8% (p = 0.1682), 74.7% vs. 68.4% (p = 0.0506), 86.7% vs. 81.7% (p = 0.0523), and 73.5% vs. 66.9% (p = 0.0450), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this exploratory analysis, fosnetupitant appeared to be more effective than fosaprepitant in preventing CINV associated with cisplatin-based HEC during the extended 7-day period following chemotherapy. INFOGRAPHIC: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2. Springer Healthcare 2022-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9098704/ /pubmed/35246827 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Brief Report
Hata, Akito
Shiraishi, Yoshimasa
Inui, Naoki
Okada, Morihito
Morise, Masahiro
Akiyoshi, Kohei
Takeda, Masayuki
Watanabe, Yasutaka
Sugawara, Shunichi
Shinagawa, Naofumi
Kubota, Kaoru
Saeki, Toshiaki
Tamura, Tomohide
Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title_full Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title_fullStr Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title_full_unstemmed Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title_short Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
title_sort exploratory analysis comparing fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant for prevention of highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (cinv): a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study (console)
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9098704/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35246827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2
work_keys_str_mv AT hataakito exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT shiraishiyoshimasa exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT inuinaoki exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT okadamorihito exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT morisemasahiro exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT akiyoshikohei exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT takedamasayuki exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT watanabeyasutaka exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT sugawarashunichi exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT shinagawanaofumi exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT kubotakaoru exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT saekitoshiaki exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole
AT tamuratomohide exploratoryanalysiscomparingfosnetupitantversusfosaprepitantforpreventionofhighlyemetogenicchemotherapyinducednauseaandvomitingcinvarandomizeddoubleblindphase3studyconsole