Search

NEPA is an oral single, fixed-dose combination of netupitant, a new highly selective NK1 RA and palonosetron (PALO), a pharmacologically/clinically distinct 5-HT3 RA. It delivers antiemetic guideline-recommended prophylaxis by targeting two critical molecular pathways associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting. This Phase III study demonstrated the superiority of NEPA compared with PALO., Background Antiemetic guidelines recommend co-administration of agents that target multiple molecular pathways involved in emesis to maximize prevention and control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). NEPA is a new oral fixed-dose combination of 300 mg netupitant, a highly selective NK1 receptor antagonist (RA) and 0.50 mg palonosetron (PALO), a pharmacologically and clinically distinct 5-HT3 RA, which targets dual antiemetic pathways. Patients and methods This multinational, randomized, double-blind, parallel group phase III study (NCT01339260) in 1455 chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving moderately emetogenic (anthracycline–cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy evaluated the efficacy and safety of a single oral dose of NEPA versus a single oral dose (0.50 mg) of PALO. All patients also received oral dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1 only (12 mg in the NEPA arm and 20 mg in the PALO arm). The primary efficacy end point was complete response (CR: no emesis, no rescue medication) during the delayed (25–120 h) phase in cycle 1. Results The percentage of patients with CR during the delayed phase was significantly higher in the NEPA group compared with the PALO group (76.9% versus 69.5%; P = 0.001), as were the percentages in the overall (0–120 h) (74.3% versus 66.6%; P = 0.001) and acute (0–24 h) (88.4% versus 85.0%; P = 0.047) phases. NEPA was also superior to PALO during the delayed and overall phases for all secondary efficacy end points of no emesis, no significant nausea and complete protection (CR plus no significant nausea). NEPA was well tolerated with a similar safety profile as PALO. Conclusions NEPA plus a single dose of DEX was superior to PALO plus DEX in preventing CINV following moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in acute, delayed and overall phases of observation. As a fixed-dose antiemetic drug combination, NEPA along with a single dose of DEX on day 1 offers guideline-based prophylaxis with a convenient, single-day treatment.

Background The aim of our study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of paclitaxel combined with a fixed dose of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to evaluate in a phase II trial the efficacy of this combination. Patients and methods Sixty-two patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were treated with paclitaxel in escalating doses from 40–80 mg/m2 combined with gemcitabine and vinorelbine at fixed doses of 1000 mg/m2 and 25 mg/m2, respectively. All drugs were given intravenously on day 1 and 8 every3 weeks. Results In a phase I trial, carried out on 21 patients, grade 4 neutropenia, as dose-limiting toxicity, occurred at the dosage level of paclitaxel 80 mg/m2. In a phase II trial, with paclitaxel administered at70 mg/m2, 27 out of 41 (66%) assessable patients responded (10% complete responses and 56% partial responses). Objective response was observed in 13 of 16 patients (81%) with stage IIIB diseaseand in 14 of 25 (56%) with stage IV disease. The median time to treatment failure was 26 weeks (range 3–72 weeks; 32 weeks and 20 weeks for stages IIIB and IV, respectively) and median survival62 weeks (range 4–176 weeks; 72 weeks and 56 weeks for stages IIIB and IV, respectively). One-year survival was 64% for all patients (72% for patients with stage IIIB and 52% for those with stage IV). Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia were observed in 11 (27%) and seven (17%) cases, respectively; grade 3 thrombocytopenia was observed in three patients (7%) and grade 3 anemia in four patients (10%). The most relevant non-hematological toxicity was grade 2/3 asthenia, which was observed in 12 patients (29%). Alopecia was almost universal, whereas nausea and vomiting were absent. Conclusions The combination of paclitaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine is effective and tolerable in the treatment of NSCLC. The high activity and low toxicity of this regimen warrant randomized studies with platinum-containing combinations.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents 15–20% of all lungcarcinomas, with a decreasing relative frequency over the lasttwo decades [1]. According to the two-stage system of theVeterans Administration Lung Cancer Group, SCLC is definedas limited stage disease (LD), when tumor is confined to onehemitorax, comprising ipsilateral, mediastinal andsupraclavicular lymph nodes, and as extensive stage disease(ED), when metastases are present in the controlateral chest orat distant sites [2]. Due to the early widespread ofmicrometastases, surgery is indicated only in few selectedpatients with very limited disease. In fact, the standardtreatment for LD and ED-SCLC, is chemotherapy plusradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone, respectively. However,most patients present with clinically obvious ED, and theirmedian overall survival (OS) is only 7–12 months long, withfive-year survival less than 2% [3].

Aim: HER2-positive tumors are associated with a poor prognosis and a shortened disease-free and overall survival as well as with other unfavorable prognostic tumor characteristics (high histological grade, high proliferative index, negative or low estrogen receptor expression, etc.). HER2-positive tumors are also responsive to treatment with trastuzumab in reducing the risk of recurrence and improving survival. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence of HER2 gene amplification in selected tumors with adverse prognostic features which scored 1+ by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Methods: 75 women with infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) and infiltrating lobular carcinoma (ILC) scoring 1+ by IHC were included. Forty-eight invasive breast carcinoma samples were selected according to unfavorable prognostic tumor characteristics and tested by FISH. HER2 amplification was evaluated using Vysis HER2/Cep17 probe (Path Vysion HER2 DNA Probe Kit®, Abbott Molecular, IL); ratio–based amplification was considered present when the HER2/Cep17 ratio was 2 or more and copy number-based amplification was considered present when the mean HER2 copy number was more than 6, in agreement with the ASCO/CAP/SIAPEC guidelines. Results: In 2013, 331 patients with invasive breast tumors were tested by IHC; 75 cases (23%) were scored 1+ of which 62 cases (19%) of IDC and 13 cases (4%) of ILC. Forty-eight invasive breast carcinoma samples (64%) were selected according to one or more unfavorable prognostic tumor characteristics; 22 out of 48 tumors (46%) showed high histological grade (G3); 27 cases (56%) had high proliferative index (Ki-67 ≥ 30%); 32 tumor samples (67%) were node-positive; and 29 cases (60%) showed vascular invasion. FISH was performed on 28 of the 1+ patients with adverse tumor characteristics and 6 IDC out of 48 (12.5%) showed HER2 amplification. Conclusions: Our preliminary retrospective data suggest that 6 patients out of 48 (12.5%) scoring 1+ by IHC show HER2 amplification, in agreement with the most recently published literature data. In order to not deny the benefit deriving from trastuzumab administration, in breast cancer patients showing IHC 1 + , it is advisable to test HER2 gene amplification by FISH. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.