International journal of clinical oncology · 2025
Sustained antiemetic efficacy of fosnetupitant versus aprepitant in carboplatin-based chemotherapy: a retrospective observational study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Inano Hiroshi, Morimoto Yoshihito, Kawamura Atsushi, Ikegami Taichi, Niizuma Tomoki, Kitagawa Kanata, Usami Rie, Nakagomi Kozue, Anzo Yuri, Uchikawa Misaki, Yamamoto Haruki, Shono Aiko, Watanabe Kazuhiro, Otori Katsuya
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Carboplatin (CBDCA) is highly emetogenic when administered at an area under the curve (AUC) ≥ 4, requiring triple antiemetic therapy, including an NK1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA). Fosnetupitant (F-NTP), a long-acting NK1 RA, may provide sustained receptor occupancy; however, its direct comparisons with aprepitant (APR) in CBDCA-based regimens between 0 and 168 h remain lacking. We aimed to evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of F-NTP versus APR during 1 week following chemotherapy.
METHODS: This retrospective single-center observational study included patients with cancer receiving CBDCA (AUC ≥ 4)-based regimens. Propensity score matching was performed using clinical factors. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR; no emesis or rescue medication) rate between 0 and 168 h. The secondary endpoints included phase-specific CR rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), and adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS: After matching, 242 patients were included in each group. The overall CR rate at 0-168 h was significantly higher with F-NTP (83.5%) than with APR (69.4%) (p < 0.001). F-NTP significantly prolonged TTF (hazard ratio = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.71, p < 0.001). The multivariate analysis revealed female sex, younger age, and high CBDCA dose as significant risk factors for non-CR, while F-NTP use was a protective factor. AEs did not differ significantly between the groups and were mostly Grade 1.
CONCLUSION: F-NTP demonstrated superior antiemetic efficacy to that of APR in CBDCA-based regimens, particularly maintaining higher CR rates through the acute and delayed phases. F-NTP was also well tolerated, supporting its potential as a strong prophylactic agent for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.
METHODS: This retrospective single-center observational study included patients with cancer receiving CBDCA (AUC ≥ 4)-based regimens. Propensity score matching was performed using clinical factors. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR; no emesis or rescue medication) rate between 0 and 168 h. The secondary endpoints included phase-specific CR rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), and adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS: After matching, 242 patients were included in each group. The overall CR rate at 0-168 h was significantly higher with F-NTP (83.5%) than with APR (69.4%) (p < 0.001). F-NTP significantly prolonged TTF (hazard ratio = 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.71, p < 0.001). The multivariate analysis revealed female sex, younger age, and high CBDCA dose as significant risk factors for non-CR, while F-NTP use was a protective factor. AEs did not differ significantly between the groups and were mostly Grade 1.
CONCLUSION: F-NTP demonstrated superior antiemetic efficacy to that of APR in CBDCA-based regimens, particularly maintaining higher CR rates through the acute and delayed phases. F-NTP was also well tolerated, supporting its potential as a strong prophylactic agent for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.