A double-blind, randomized, multicenter phase 3 study of palonosetron vs granisetron combined with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer receiving anthracycline and cyclophosphamide

Cancer Med. 2020 May;9(10):3319-3327. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2979. Epub 2020 Mar 13.

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate whether palonosetron is better than granisetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in a three-drug combination with dexamethasone and fosaprepitant (Fos) in patients with breast cancer who are placed on anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC-based regimen).

Patients and methods: Chemo-naive women with primary breast cancer were randomly administered either palonosetron 0.75 mg (day 1) or granisetron 1 mg (day 1) combined with dexamethasone (12 mg at day 1, 8 mg at day 2 and day 3) and Fos 150 mg (day 1) before receiving AC-based regimen in a double-blind study. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate of emesis in cycle 1 in the delayed phase. This was defined as neither vomiting nor rescue drug usage for emesis at >24-120 hours after chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were the CR in the acute/overall phase (0-24/0-120 hours, respectively, after chemotherapy), no nausea and vomiting, Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and safety.

Results: From December 2012 to October 2014, 326 patients were treated and evaluated (164/162 evaluable patients in granisetron/palonosetron arm, respectively). The CR during the delayed phase was 60.4% in the granisetron regimen and 62.3% in the palonosetron regimen. The CR during acute phase (73.2% vs 75.9%, respectively) and the CR during overall phase (54.9% in both regimens) were very identical. A significantly higher number of patients in the palonosetron arm were free from nausea during the delayed phase (28% vs 40.1%; P = .029). Adverse events were also identical, although infusion site reactions (ISR) were higher (20.3%-23.3%) than preceding studies in both regimens.

Conclusion: In combination with dexamethasone and Fos, this study suggests that palonosetron is not better than granisetron in chemo-naive patients with primary breast cancer receiving AC-based regimen. Administration of Fos in peripheral veins after AC-based regimen increased ISR.

Keywords: AC regimen; CINV; fosaprepitant; granisetron; palonosetron.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial, Phase III
  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Antiemetics / therapeutic use*
  • Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / adverse effects*
  • Breast Neoplasms / drug therapy*
  • Cyclophosphamide / administration & dosage
  • Dexamethasone / therapeutic use*
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Doxorubicin / administration & dosage
  • Drug Therapy, Combination
  • Epirubicin / administration & dosage
  • Female
  • Fluorouracil / administration & dosage
  • Granisetron / therapeutic use*
  • Humans
  • Middle Aged
  • Morpholines / therapeutic use*
  • Nausea / chemically induced
  • Nausea / prevention & control*
  • Palonosetron / therapeutic use*
  • Patient Reported Outcome Measures
  • Vomiting / chemically induced
  • Vomiting / prevention & control*

Substances

  • Antiemetics
  • Morpholines
  • Epirubicin
  • Palonosetron
  • fosaprepitant
  • Dexamethasone
  • Doxorubicin
  • Cyclophosphamide
  • Fluorouracil
  • Granisetron

Associated data

  • UMIN-CTR/UMIN000008897