2011Journal of Clinical OncologyRequires access

Analysis of phase III clinical studies for palonosetron, ondansetron, dolasetron, and granisetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

Sally Barbour, Gary R. Morrow, R. Ahmed, Gianluca Ballinari, Michael Thorn, D Cox, L. Schwartzberg

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

9091 Background: Controlling CINV is integral to treatment success in cancer patients. Palonosetron HCl (PALO) is a potent 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with a longer t½ & a distinctly different receptor binding profile compared to 1st generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (1st 5HT3-RA). Methods: We conducted an analysis of 4 multicenter, phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel & active comparator studies to assess the comparative safety & effectiveness of single IV doses of PALO 0.25mg / 0.75mg to 1st 5HT3-RAs ondansetron 32mg, dolasetron 100mg, & granisetron 3mg in the prevention of CINV. Results: Pooled patient-level data was used from all 4 phase III clinical studies in CINV. The primary efficacy assessment was a comparison of complete response (CR), defined as no emetic episode & no rescue medication for 0-24hrs (acute), >24-120hrs (delayed), & 0-120hrs (overall) using a logistic regression model with terms for PALO 0.25, PALO 0.75, HEC, MEC, Japanese study, Breast Cancer, Lung Cancer, & interaction terms for Breast Cancer & Lung Cancer with PALO. A comparative descriptive safety assessment was also conducted. A total of 2969 patients were included in the analysis-PALO 0.25mg, n=609; PALO 0.75mg, n=1182; & 1st 5HT3-RA, n=1178. Significantly higher CR rates were demonstrated for all PALO doses vs. 1st 5HT3-RA during the acute (0-24hr) phase, OR=0.89; p<0.01; delayed (>24-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001; & overall (0-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001. The adverse event (AE) profile of all doses of PALO was similar to 1st 5HT3-RA in all trials, with up to 96.8% of patients reporting an AE. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was also similar across trials; PALO 0.25mg, up to 20.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 28.8%; & 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 32.2%. The most notable TEAEs were constipation (PALO 0.25mg, up to 4.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 16.6%; 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 15.4%.) & headache (PALO 0.25mg, up to 9.7%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 12.4%; 1st Gen 5HT3-RA, up to 11.0%). Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated a similar safety profile & significantly improved CINV prophylaxis in the acute, delayed, and overall phase for palonosetron compared to 1st 5HT3-RA.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

9091 Background: Controlling CINV is integral to treatment success in cancer patients. Palonosetron HCl (PALO) is a potent 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with a longer t½ & a distinctly different receptor binding profile compared to 1st generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (1st 5HT3-RA). Methods: We conducted an analysis of 4 multicenter, phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel & active comparator studies to assess the comparative safety & effectiveness of single IV doses of PALO 0.25mg / 0.75mg to 1st 5HT3-RAs ondansetron 32mg, dolasetron 100mg, & granisetron 3mg in the prevention of CINV. Results: Pooled patient-level data was used from all 4 phase III clinical studies in CINV. The primary efficacy assessment was a comparison of complete response (CR), defined as no emetic episode & no rescue medication for 0-24hrs (acute), >24-120hrs (delayed), & 0-120hrs (overall) using a logistic regression model with terms for PALO 0.25, PALO 0.75, HEC, MEC, Japanese study, Breast Cancer, Lung Cancer, & interaction terms for Breast Cancer & Lung Cancer with PALO. A comparative descriptive safety assessment was also conducted. A total of 2969 patients were included in the analysis-PALO 0.25mg, n=609; PALO 0.75mg, n=1182; & 1st 5HT3-RA, n=1178. Significantly higher CR rates were demonstrated for all PALO doses vs. 1st 5HT3-RA during the acute (0-24hr) phase, OR=0.89; p<0.01; delayed (>24-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001; & overall (0-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001. The adverse event (AE) profile of all doses of PALO was similar to 1st 5HT3-RA in all trials, with up to 96.8% of patients reporting an AE. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was also similar across trials; PALO 0.25mg, up to 20.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 28.8%; & 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 32.2%. The most notable TEAEs were constipation (PALO 0.25mg, up to 4.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 16.6%; 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 15.4%.) & headache (PALO 0.25mg, up to 9.7%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 12.4%; 1st Gen 5HT3-RA, up to 11.0%). Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated a similar safety profile & significantly improved CINV prophylaxis in the acute, delayed, and overall phase for palonosetron compared to 1st 5HT3-RA.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

9091 Background: Controlling CINV is integral to treatment success in cancer patients. Palonosetron HCl (PALO) is a potent 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with a longer t½ & a distinctly different receptor binding profile compared to 1st generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (1st 5HT3-RA). Methods: We conducted an analysis of 4 multicenter, phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel & active comparator studies to assess the comparative safety & effectiveness of single IV doses of PALO 0.25mg / 0.75mg to 1st 5HT3-RAs ondansetron 32mg, dolasetron 100mg, & granisetron 3mg in the prevention of CINV. Results: Pooled patient-level data was used from all 4 phase III clinical studies in CINV. The primary efficacy assessment was a comparison of complete response (CR), defined as no emetic episode & no rescue medication for 0-24hrs (acute), >24-120hrs (delayed), & 0-120hrs (overall) using a logistic regression model with terms for PALO 0.25, PALO 0.75, HEC, MEC, Japanese study, Breast Cancer, Lung Cancer, & interaction terms for Breast Cancer & Lung Cancer with PALO. A comparative descriptive safety assessment was also conducted. A total of 2969 patients were included in the analysis-PALO 0.25mg, n=609; PALO 0.75mg, n=1182; & 1st 5HT3-RA, n=1178. Significantly higher CR rates were demonstrated for all PALO doses vs. 1st 5HT3-RA during the acute (0-24hr) phase, OR=0.89; p<0.01; delayed (>24-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001; & overall (0-120hr) phase, OR=0.81, p<0.0001. The adverse event (AE) profile of all doses of PALO was similar to 1st 5HT3-RA in all trials, with up to 96.8% of patients reporting an AE. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was also similar across trials; PALO 0.25mg, up to 20.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 28.8%; & 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 32.2%. The most notable TEAEs were constipation (PALO 0.25mg, up to 4.5%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 16.6%; 1st 5HT3-RA, up to 15.4%.) & headache (PALO 0.25mg, up to 9.7%; PALO 0.75mg, up to 12.4%; 1st Gen 5HT3-RA, up to 11.0%). Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated a similar safety profile & significantly improved CINV prophylaxis in the acute, delayed, and overall phase for palonosetron compared to 1st 5HT3-RA.

Key concepts: Palonosetron, Medicine, Granisetron, Ondansetron, Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, Lung cancer, Nausea, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Analysis of phase III clinical studies for palonosetron, ondansetron, dolasetron, and granisetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). — Research Paper | ScholarLens