Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Ramosetron versus Palonosetron in Combination with Aprepitant and Dexamethasone for the Control of Highly-Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

  • Jin Hyoung Kang
  • , Jung Hye Kwon
  • , Yun Gyoo Lee
  • , Keon Uk Park
  • , Ho Jung An
  • , Joohyuk Sohn
  • , Young Mi Seol
  • , Hyunwoo Lee
  • , Hwan Jung Yun
  • , Jin Seok Ahn
  • , Ji Hyun Yang
  • , Hunho Song
  • , Dong Hoe Koo
  • , Jin Young Kim
  • , Gun Min Kim
  • , Hwa Jung Kim
  • Hallym University
  • Sungkyunkwan University
  • Keimyung University
  • Yonsei University
  • Pusan National University
  • Ajou University
  • Chungnam National University
  • Catholic Univ. of Korea Coll. Med.
  • University of Ulsan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

Original Article Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare ramosetron (RAM), aprepitant (APR), and dexamethasone (DEX) [RAD] with palonosetron (PAL), APR, and DEX [PAD] in controlling highlyemetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)-induced nausea and vomiting. Materials and Methods Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive RAD or PAD:RAM (0.3 mg intravenously) or PAL (0.25 mg intravenously) D1, combined with APR (125 mg orally, D1 and 80 mg orally, D2-3) and DEX (12 mg orally or intravenously, D1 and 8 mg orally, D2-4). Patients were stratified by sex, cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and administration schedule. The primary endpoint was overall complete response (CR), defined as no emesis and no rescue regimen during 5 days of HEC. Secondary endpoints were overall complete protection (CP; CR+nausea score < 25 mm) and total control (TC; CR+nausea score < 5 mm). Quality of life was assessed by Functional Living Index Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire on D0 and D6. Results A total of 279 patients receiving RAD (n=137) or PAD (n=142) were evaluated. Overall CR rates in RAD and PAD recipients were 81.8% and 79.6% (risk difference [RD], 2.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], !7.1 to 11.4), respectively. Overall CP and TC rates for RAD and PAD were 56.2% and 58.5% (RD, !2.3%; 95% CI, !13.9 to 9.4) and 47.5% vs. 43.7% (RD, 3.8%; 95% CI, !7.9 to 15.5), respectively. FLIE total score " 108 (no impact on daily life) was comparable between RAD and PAD (73.9% vs. 73.4%, respectively). Adverse events were similar between the two groups. Conclusion In all aspects of efficacy, safety and quality of life, RAD is non-inferior to PAD for the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving HEC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)907-916
Number of pages10
JournalCancer Research and Treatment
Volume52
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2020

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Korean Cancer Association. All rights reserved.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Antiemetics
  • Aprepitant
  • Nausea
  • Neoplasms
  • Palonosetron
  • Ramosetron
  • Vomiting

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Ramosetron versus Palonosetron in Combination with Aprepitant and Dexamethasone for the Control of Highly-Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this