Browsing by Author "Loprinzi, Charles L."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Cisplatin-associated neuropathy characteristics compared to those associated with other neurotoxic chemotherapy agents (Alliance A151724)
    (Springer, 2021) Albany, Costantine; Dockter, Travis; Wolfe, Eric; Le-Rademacher, Jennifer; Wagner-Johnston, Nina; Einhorn, Lawrence; Lafky, Jackie; Smith, Ellen; Pachman, Deirdre; Staff, Nathan; Ma, Cynthia; Loprinzi, Charles L.; Costello, Brian A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Purpose: The current project was developed to obtain natural history information regarding cisplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy in males with testicular/germ cell cancers and to compare such neuropathy data with similarly obtained data in patients receiving other chemotherapy drugs in similarly conducted clinical trials. Methods: Patients without baseline neuropathy symptoms, who were initiating cisplatin-based chemotherapy, completed the EORTC CIPN 20 patient-reported instrument to evaluate chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Results were compared with EORTC CIPN 20 data obtained from independent study sets regarding patients receiving (1) paclitaxel, (2) combined paclitaxel and carboplatin, (3) oxaliplatin, or (4) a combination of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). The last study set of patients on AC was selected to evaluate the use of EORTC CIPN 20 data in patients receiving chemotherapy not known to cause CIPN. Results: Cisplatin-induced neuropathy was more similar to neuropathy in patients receiving oxaliplatin than in those receiving paclitaxel. The cisplatin and oxaliplatin groups exhibited the coasting phenomenon and more prominent upper extremity symptoms than lower extremity symptoms during chemotherapy administration weeks. In contrast, paclitaxel-treated patients did not, on average, exhibit the coasting phenomenon; additionally, lower extremity symptoms were more prominent during the weeks when paclitaxel was administered. Cisplatin-induced neuropathy was less severe than was seen in patients in the other two groups, potentially because the cisplatin-receiving patients were younger. Patients receiving AC did not report substantial EORTC CIPN 20 changes. Conclusion: Understanding neuropathy similarities and differences with various chemotherapy agents may help elucidate CIPN processes and facilitate means to prevent and/or treat established CIPN.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Olanzapine for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting
    (Massachusetts Medical Society, 2016-07-14) Navari, Rudolph M.; Qin, Rui; Ruddy, Kathryn J.; Liu, Heshan; Powell, Steven F.; Bajaj, Madhuri; Dietrich, Leah; Biggs, David; Lafky, Jacqueline M.; Loprinzi, Charles L.; Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine
    BACKGROUND We examined the efficacy of olanzapine for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we compared olanzapine with placebo, in combination with dexamethasone, aprepitant or fosaprepitant, and a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3–receptor antagonist, in patients with no previous chemotherapy who were receiving cisplatin (≥70 mg per square meter of body-surface area) or cyclophosphamide–doxorubicin. The doses of the three concomitant drugs administered before and after chemotherapy were similar in the two groups. The two groups received either 10 mg of olanzapine orally or matching placebo daily on days 1 through 4. Nausea prevention was the primary end point; a complete response (no emesis and no use of rescue medication) was a secondary end point. RESULTS In the analysis, we included 380 patients who could be evaluated (192 assigned to olanzapine, and 188 to placebo). The proportion of patients with no chemotherapy-induced nausea was significantly greater with olanzapine than with placebo in the first 24 hours after chemotherapy (74% vs. 45%, P = 0.002), the period from 25 to 120 hours after chemotherapy (42% vs. 25%, P = 0.002), and the overall 120-hour period (37% vs. 22%, P = 0.002). The complete-response rate was also significantly increased with olanzapine during the three periods: 86% versus 65% (P<0.001), 67% versus 52% (P = 0.007), and 64% versus 41% (P<0.001), respectively. Although there were no grade 5 toxic effects, some patients receiving olanzapine had increased sedation (severe in 5%) on day 2. CONCLUSIONS Olanzapine, as compared with placebo, significantly improved nausea prevention, as well as the complete-response rate, among previously untreated patients who were receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02116530.)
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Olanzapine for the Treatment of Advanced Cancer–Related Chronic Nausea and/or Vomiting
    (American Medical Association, 2020-06) Navari, Rudolph M.; Pywell, Cameron M.; Le-Rademacher, Jennifer G.; White, Patrick; Dodge, Andrew B.; Albany, Costantine; Loprinzi, Charles L.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Importance: Nausea and vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, can be substantial symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Objective: To evaluate the utility of olanzapine for treating chronic nausea/vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, in patients with advanced cancer. Design, setting, and participants: This study is a double-line, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted from July 2017 through April 2019, with analysis conducted in 2019. Eligible participants were outpatients with advanced cancer who had persistent nausea/vomiting without having had chemotherapy or radiotherapy in the prior 14 days. Chronic nausea was present for at least 1 week (worst daily nausea numeric rating scores needed to be greater than 3 on a 0-10 scale). Interventions: Patients received olanzapine (5 mg) or a placebo, orally, daily for 7 days. Main outcomes and measures: Patient-reported outcomes were used for study end points. Data were collected at baseline and daily for 7 more days. The primary study end point (the change in nausea numeric rating scores from baseline to the last treatment day) and the study hypothesis were both identified prior to data collection. Results: A total of 30 patients (15 per arm) were enrolled; these included 16 women and 14 men who had a mean (range) age of 63 (39-79) years. Baseline median nausea scores, in all patients, were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10). After 1 day and 1 week, the median nausea scores in the placebo arm were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10) on both days, compared with the olanzapine arm scores of 2 out of 10 (range, 2-3) after day 1 and 1 out of 10 (range, 0-3) after 1 week. After 1 week of treatment, the reduction in nausea scores in the olanzapine arm was 8 points (95% CI, 7-8) higher than that of the placebo arm. The primary 2-sided end point P value was <.001. Correspondingly, patients in the olanzapine arm reported less emesis, less use of other antiemetic drugs, better appetite, less sedation, less fatigue, and better well-being. One patient, on the placebo, stopped treatment early owing to lack of perceived benefit. No patients receiving olanzapine reported excess sedation or any other adverse event. Conclusions and relevance: Olanzapine, at 5 mg/d, appeared to be effective in controlling nausea and emesis and in improving other symptoms and quality-of-life parameters in the study population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03137121.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Prevention and Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Survivors of Adult Cancers: ASCO Guideline Update
    (ASCO, 2020-10) Loprinzi, Charles L.; Lacchetti, Christina; Bleeker, Jonathan; Cavaletti, Guido; Chauhan, Cynthia; Hertz, Daniel L.; Kelley, Mark R.; Lavino, Antoinette; Lustberg, Maryam B.; Paice, Judith A.; Schneider, Bryan P.; Lavoie Smith, Ellen M.; Smith, Mary Lou; Smith, Thomas J.; Wagner Johnston, Nina; Hershman, Dawn L.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    PURPOSE To update the ASCO guideline on the recommended prevention and treatment approaches in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in adult cancer survivors. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews to identify new studies. RESULTS The search strategy identified 257 new references, which led to a full-text review of 87 manuscripts. A total of 3 systematic reviews, 2 with meta-analyses, and 28 primary trials for prevention of CIPN in addition to 14 primary trials related to treatment of established CIPN, are included in this update. RECOMMENDATIONS The identified data reconfirmed that no agents are recommended for the prevention of CIPN. The use of acetyl-l-carnitine for the prevention of CIPN in patients with cancer should be discouraged. Furthermore, clinicians should assess the appropriateness of dose delaying, dose reduction, substitutions, or stopping chemotherapy in patients who develop intolerable neuropathy and/or functional impairment. Duloxetine is the only agent that has appropriate evidence to support its use for patients with established painful CIPN. Nonetheless, the amount of benefit from duloxetine is limited.