Aprepitant Drug Information
Generic name: APREPITANT
Substance P/Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonist [EPC]
Uses of Aprepitant
- Aprepitant is a substance P/neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonist. Aprepitant capsules are indicated
- in combination with other antiemetic agents, in patients 12 years of age and older for prevention of: o acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of highly emetogenic cancer chemotherapy (HEC) including high-dose cisplatin ( 1.1 ) o nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of moderately emetogenic cancer chemotherapy (MEC) ( 1.1 )
- for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in adults ( 1.2 ) Limitations of Use : ( 1.3 )
- Aprepitant has not been studied for treatment of established nausea and vomiting.
- Chronic continuous administration of aprepitant is not recommended.
Dosage & Administration of Aprepitant
| Aprepitant capsules* | Adults and Pediatric Patients 12 Years and Older | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Dexamethasone | Adults | ||
| Pediatric Patients 12 Years and Older | If a corticosteroid, such as dexamethasone, is co-administered, administer 50% of the recommended corticosteroid dose on Days 1 through 4 | ||
| 5-HT3 antagonist | Adults and Pediatric Patients 12 Years and Older | ||
Side Effects of Aprepitant
- Most common adverse reactions (≥3%) are ( 6.1 ): Prevention of Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV)
- Adults: fatigue, diarrhea, asthenia, dyspepsia, abdominal pain, hiccups, white blood cell count decreased, dehydration, and alanine aminotransferase increased.
- Pediatrics: neutropenia, headache, diarrhea, decreased appetite, cough, fatigue, hemoglobin decreased, dizziness, and hiccups. PONV
- Adults: constipation and hypotension. To report SUSPECTED ADVERSE REACTIONS, contact Torrent Pharma Inc. at 1-800-912-9561 or FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch 6.1 Clinical Trials Experience Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of another drug and may not reflect the rates observed in clinical practice. The overall safety of aprepitant was evaluated in approximately 6,800 individuals. Adverse Reactions in Adults in the Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with HEC and MEC In 2 active-controlled, double-blind clinical trials in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) (Studies 1 and 2), aprepitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone (aprepitant regimen) was compared to ondansetron and dexamethasone alone (standard therapy [see Clinical Studies ( 14.1 )]. In 2 active-controlled clinical trials in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) (Studies 3 and 4), aprepitant in combination with ondasetron and dexamethasone (aprepitant regimen) was compared to ondansetron and dexamethasone alone (standard therapy) [see Clinical Studies ( 14.2 )] . The most common adverse reaction reported in patients who received MEC in pooled Studies 3 and 4 was dyspepsia (6% versus 4%). Across these 4 studies there were 1,412 patients treated with the aprepitant regimen during Cycle 1 of chemotherapy and 1,099 of these patients continued into the Mutliplwe-Cycle extension for up to 6 cycles of chemotherapy. The most common adverse reactions reported in patients who received HEC and MEC in pooled Studies 1, 2, 3 and 4 are listed in Table 5. Table 5: Most Common Adverse Reactions in Patients Receiving HEC and MEC from a Pooled Analysis of HEC and MEC Studies* Aprepitant , ondansetron, and dexamethasone † (N=1,412) Ondansetron and dexamethasone ‡ (N=1,396) fatigue 13% 12% diarrhea 9% 8% asthenia 7% 6% dyspepsia 7% 5% abdominal pain 6% 5% hiccups 5% 3% white blood cell count decreased 4% 3% dehydration 3% 2% alanine aminotransferase increased 3% 2% In a pooled analysis of the HEC and MEC studies, less common adverse reactions reported in patients with the aprepitant regimen are listed in Table 6. Table 6: Less Common Adverse Reactions in Aprepitant-Treated Patients from a Pooled Analysis of HEC and MEC Studies* Infection and Infestations oral candidiasis, pharyngitis Blood and the Lymphatic System Disorders anemia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders decreased appetite, hypokalemia Psychiatric Disorders anxiety Nervous System Disorders dizziness, dysgeusia, peripheral neuropathy Cardiac Disorders palpitations Vascular Disorders flushing, hot flush Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders cough, dyspnea, oropharyngeal pain Gastrointestinal Disorders dry mouth, eructation, flatulence, gastritis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, nausea, vomiting Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders alopecia, hyperhidrosis, rash Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders musculoskeletal pain General Disorders and Administration Site Condition edema peripheral, malaise Investigations aspartate aminotransferase increased, blood alkaline phosphatase increased, blood sodium decreased, blood urea increased, proteinuria, weight decreased In additional active-controlled clinical study 1,169 patients receiving aprepitant and HEC, the adverse reactions were generally similar to that seen in the other HEC studies with aprepitant. In another CINV study, Stevens-Johnson syndrome was reported as a serious adverse reaction in a patient receiving the aprepitant regimen with cancer chemotherapy. Adverse reactions in the Multiple-Cycle extensions of HEC and MEC studies for up to 6 cycles of chemotherapy were generally similar to that observed in Cycle 1. Adverse Reactions in Pediatric Patients 6 Months to 17 Years of Age in the Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with HEC or MEC In a pooled analysis of 2 active-controlled clinical trials in pediatric patients aged 6 months to 17 years who received highly or moderately emetogenic cancer chemotherapy (Study 5 and a safety study, Study 6), aprepitant in combination with ondansetron with or without dexamethasone (aprepitant regimen) was compared to ondansetron with or without dexamethasone (control regimen). There were 184 patients treated with the aprepitant regimen during Cycle 1 and 215 patients received open-label aprepitant for up to 9 additional cycles of chemotherapy. In Cycle 1, the most common adverse reactions reported in pediatric patients treated with the aprepitant regimen in pooled Studies 5 and 6 are listed in Table 7. Table 7: Most Common Adverse Reactions in Aprepitant-Treated Pediatric Patients in HEC and MEC Pooled Studies 5 and 6* Aprepitant and ondansetron (N=184) Ondansetron (N=168) neutropenia 13% 11% headache 9% 5% diarrhea 6% 5% decreased appetite 5% 4% cough 5% 3% fatigue 5% 2% hemoglobin decreased 5% 4% dizziness 5% 1% hiccups 4% 1% Forty-nine patients were treated with ifosfamide chemotherapy in each arm. Two of the patients treated with ifosfamide in the aprepitant are developed behavioral changes (agitation = 1; abnormal behavior = 1), whereas no patient treatesd with ifosfamide in the control arm developed behavioral changes. Aprepitant has the potential for increasing ifosfamide-mediated neurotoxicity through induction of CYP3A4 [see Drug Interactions ( 7.1 ) and Clinical Pharmacology ( 12.3 )] . Adverse Reactions in Adult Patients in the Prevention of PONV In 2 active-controlled, double-blind clinical studies in patients receiving general anesthesia (Studies 7 and 8), 40 mg-oral aprepitant was compared to 4-mg intravenous ondansetron [see Clinical Studies (14.4)]. There were 564 patients treated with aprepitant and 538 patients treated with ondansetron. The most common adverse reactions reported in patients treated with aprepitant for PONV in pooled Studies 7 and 8 are listed in Table 8. Table 8: Most Common Adverse Reactions in Aprepitant-Treated Patients in a Pooled Analysis of PONV Studies* Aprepitant 40 mg (N = 564) Ondansetron (N = 538) constipation 9% 8% hypotension 6% 5% In a pooled analysis of PONV studies, less common adverse reactions reported in patients treated with aprepitant are listed in Table 9. Table 9: Less Common Adverse Reactions in Aprepitant-Treated Patients in a Pooled Analysis of PONV Studies* Infections and Infestations postoperative infection Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders hypokalemia, hypovolemia Nervous System Disorders dizziness, hypoesthesia, syncope Cardiac Disorders bradycardia Vascular Disorders hematoma Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders dyspnea, hypoxia, respiratory depression Gastrointestinal Disorders abdominal pain, dry mouth, dyspepsia Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders urticaria General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions hypothermia Investigations blood albumin decreased, bilirubin increased, blood glucose increased, blood potassium decreased Injury, Poisoning and Procedural Complications operative hemorrhage, wound dehiscence In addition, two serious adverse reactions were reported in PONV clinical studies in patients taking a higher than recommended dose of aprepitant: one case of constipation, and one case of sub-ileus. Other Studies Angioedema and urticaria were reported as serious adverse reactions in a patient receiving aprepitant in a non-CINV/non-PONV study (aprepitant is only approved in the CINV and PONV populations). 6.2 Postmarketing Experience The following adverse reactions have been identified during post-approval use of aprepitant. Because these reactions are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequency or establish a causal relationship to drug exposure. Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders: pruritus, rash, urticaria, Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis. Immune system disorders: hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylactic reactions [see Contraindications ( 4 )] . Nervous system disorders: ifosfamide-induced neurotoxicity reported after aprepitant and ifosfamide coadministration.
Warnings & Cautions for Aprepitant
- CYP3A4 Interactions : Aprepitant is a substrate, weak-to-moderate inhibitor and inducer of CYP3A4; See Full Prescribing Information for recommendations regarding contraindications, risk of adverse reactions, and dosage adjustments of aprepitant and concomitant drugs. ( 4 , 5.1 , 7.1 , 7.2 )
- Warfarin (a CYP2C9 substrate) : Risk of decreased INR of prothrombin time; monitor INR in 2-week period, particularly at 7 to 10 days, following initiation of aprepitant. ( 5.2 , 7.1 )
- Hormonal Contraceptives : Efficacy of contraceptives may be reduced during administration of and for 28 days following the last dose of aprepitant. Use effective alternative or back-up methods of contraception. ( 5.3 , 7.1 , 8.3 ) 5.1 Clinically Significant CYP3A4 Aprepitant is a substrate, a weak-to-moderate (dose-dependent) inhibitor, and an inducer of CYP3A4. Use of aprepitant with other drugs that are CYP3A4 substrates, may result in increased plasma concentration of the concomitant drug. Use of pimozide with aprepitant is contraindicated due to the risk of significantly increased plasma concentrations of pimozide, potentially resulting in prolongation of the QT interval, a known adverse reaction of pimozide [see Contraindications ( 4 )] . Use of aprepitant with strong or moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors (e.g., ketoconazole, diltiazem) may increase plasma conentrations of aprepitant and result in an increased risk of adverse reactions related to aprepitant. Use of aprepitant with strong CYP3A4 inducers (e.g., rifampin) may result in a reduction in aprepitant plasma concentrations and decreased efficacy of aprepitant. See table 10 and 11 for a listing of potentially significant drug interactions [see Drug Interactions ( 7.1 , 7.2 )] . 5.2 Decrease in INR with Concomitant Warfarin Coadministration of aprepitant with warfarin, a CYP2C9 substrate, may result in a clinically significant decrease in International Normalized Ratio (INR) of prothrombin time [see Clinical Pharmacology ( 12.3 )] . Monitor the INR in patients on chronic warfarin therapy in the 2-week period, particularly at 7 to 10 days, following initiation of the 3-day regimen of aprepitant with each chemotherapy cycle, or following administration of a single 40-mg dose of aprepitant for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting [see Drug Interactions ( 7.1 )]. 5.3 Risk of Reduced Efficacy of Hormonal Contraceptives Upon coadministration with aprepitant, the efficacy of hormonal contraceptives may be reduced during administration of and for 28 days following the last dose of aprepitant [see Clinical Pharmacology ( 12.3 )]. Advise patients to use effective alternative or back-up methods of contraception during treatment with aprepitant and for 1 month following the last dose of aprepitant [see Drug Interactions ( 7.1 ), Use in Specific Populations ( 8.3 )].
Drug Interactions with Aprepitant
Effect of Aprepitant on the Pharmacokinetics of Other Drugs Aprepitant is a
substrate, a weak-to-moderate (dose-dependent) inhibitor, and an inducer of CYP3A4. Aprepitant is also an inducer of CYP2C9 . Aprepitant acts as a moderate inhibitor of CYP3A4 when administered as a 3-day regimen (125mg/80-mg/80-mg) and can increase plasma concentrations of concomitant drugs that are substrates for CYP3A4. Aprepitant acts as a weak inhibitor when administered as a single 40-mg dose and has not been shown to alter the plasma concentrations of concomitant drugs that are primarily metabolized through CYP3A4. Some substrates of CYP3A4 are contraindicated with aprepitant . Dosage adjustment of some CYP3A4 and CYP2C9 substrates may be warranted, as shown in Table 10. Table 10: Effects of Aprepitant on the Pharmacokinetics of Other Drugs CYP3A4 Substrates Pimozide Clinical Impact Increased pimozide exposure Intervention Aprepitant is contraindicated . Benzodiazepines Clinical Impact Increased exposure to midazolam or other benzodiazepines metabolized via CYP3A4 (alprazolam, triazolam) may increase the risk of adverse reactions. Intervention 3-day aprepitant regimen Monitor for benzodiazepine-related adverse reactions. Depending on the clinical situation (e.g., elderly patients) and degree of monitoring available, reduce the dose of intravenous midazolam Single 40 mg dose of aprepitant No dosage adjustment of the benzodiazepine needed Dexamethasone Clinical Impact Increased dexamethasone exposure.
Intervention 3-day aprepitant regimen Reduce the dose of oral dexamethasone by approximately 50%. Single 40 mg dose of aprepitant No dosage adjustment of oral dexamethasone needed Methylprednisolone Clinical Impact Increased methylprednisolone exposure. Intervention 3-day aprepitant regimen Reduce the dose of intravenous methylprednisolone by approximately 25% Reduce the dose of oral methylprednisolone by approximately 50% Single 40 mg dose of aprepitant No dosage adjustment of methylprednisolone needed Chemotherapeutic agents that are metabolized by CYP3A4 Clinical Impact Increased exposure of the chemotherapeutic agent may increase the risk of adverse reactions . Intervention Vinblastine, vincristine, or ifosfamide or other chemotherapeutic agents Monitor for chemotherapeutic-related adverse reactions. Etoposide, vinorelbine, paclitaxel, and docetaxel No dosage adjustment needed.
Hormonal Contraceptives Clinical Impact Decreased hormonal exposure during administration of and for 28 days after administration of the last dose of aprepitant . Intervention Effective alternative or back-up methods of contraception (such as condoms and spermicides) should be used during treatment with aprepitant and for 1 month following the last dose of aprepitant. Examples birth control pills, skin patches, implants, and certain IUDs CYP2C9 Substrates Warfarin Clinical Impact Decreased warfarin exposure and decreased prothrombin time (INR) . Intervention In patients on chronic warfarin therapy, monitor the prothrombin time (INR) in the 2-week period, particularly at 7 to 10 days, following initiation of the 3-day aprepitant regimen with each chemotherapy cycle, or following administration of a single 40-mg dose of aprepitant. Other 5-HT 3 Antagonists Clinical Impact No change in the exposure of the 5-HT 3 antagonist . Intervention No dosage adjustment needed Examples ondansetron, granisetron, dolasetron
Effect of Other Drugs on the Pharmacokinetics of Aprepitant Aprepitant is a
CYP3A4 substrate . Co-administration of aprepitant with drugs that are inhibitors or inducers of CYP3A4 may result in increased or decreased plasma concentrations of aprepitant, respectively, as shown in Table 11. Table 11: Effects of Other Drugs on Pharmacokinetics of Aprepitant Moderate to Strong CYP3A4 Inhibitors Clinical Impact Significantly increased exposure of aprepitant may increase the risk of adverse reactions associated with aprepitant . Intervention Avoid concomitant use of aprepitant Examples Moderate inhibitor: diltiazem Strong inhibitors: ketoconazole, itraconazole, nefazodone, troleandomycin, clarithromycin, ritonavir, nelfinavir Strong CYP3A4 Inducers Clinical Impact Substantially decreased exposure of aprepitant in patients chronically taking a strong CYP3A4 inducer may decrease the efficacy of aprepitant . Intervention Avoid concomitant use of aprepitant Examples rifampin, carbamazepine, phenytoin
Pregnancy Safety for Aprepitant
Risk Summary There are insufficient data on use of aprepitant in pregnant women to inform a drug associated risk. In animal reproduction studies, no adverse developmental effects were observed in rats or rabbits exposed during the period of organogenesis to systemic drug levels (AUC) approximately 1.5 times the adult human exposure at the 125-mg/80-mg/ 80-mg aprepitant regimen . The estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage for the indicated populations is unknown. In the U.S. general population, the estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage in clinically recognized pregnancies is 2 to 4% and 15 to 20%, respectively.
Data Animal Data In embryofetal development studies in rats and rabbits, aprepitant was administered during the period of organogenesis at oral doses up to 1,000 mg/kg twice daily in rats and up to the maximum tolerated dose of 25 mg/kg/day in rabbits. No embryofetal lethality or malformations were observed at any dose level in either species. The exposures (AUC) in pregnant rats at 1,000 mg/kg twice daily and in pregnant rabbits at 125 mg/kg/day were approximately 1.5 times the adult exposure at the 125-mg/80mg/80-mg aprepitant regimen.
Aprepitant crosses the placenta in rats and rabbits.
Pediatric Use of Aprepitant
Pediatric Use Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with HEC or MEC The safety and effectiveness of aprepitant capsules in pediatric patients 12 years of age and older for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of HEC, including high-dose cisplatin, and MEC. Use of aprepitant in these age groups is supported by evidence from 302 pediatric patients in a randomized, double-blind, active comparator controlled clinical study (n=207 patients aged 6 months to less than 12 years, n=95 patients aged 12 through 17 years). Aprepitant was studied in combination with ondansetron with or without dexamethasone (at the discretion of the physician) . Adverse reactions were similar to those reported in adult patients . The safety and effectiveness of aprepitant for the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with HEC or MEC have not been established in patients less than 6 months. Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) The safety and effectiveness of aprepitant have not been established for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients. Juvenile Animal Study A study was conducted in young rats to evaluate the effects of aprepitant on growth and on neurobehavioral and sexual development.
Rats were treated at oral doses up to the maximum feasible dose of 1,000 mg/kg twice daily (providing exposure in male rats lower than the exposure at the recommended pediatric human dose and exposure in female rats equivalent to the pediatric human exposure) from the early postnatal period (Postnatal Day 10) through Postnatal Day 58. Slight changes in the onset of sexual maturation were observed in female and male rats; however, there were no effects on mating, fertility, embryonic-fetal survival, or histomorphology of the reproductive organs. There were no effects in neurobehavioral tests of sensory function, motor function, and learning and memory.
Contraindications for Aprepitant
- Aprepitant is contraindicated in patients:
- who are hypersensitive to any component of the product. Hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylactic reactions have been reported [see Adverse Reactions ( 6.2 )] .
- taking pimozide. Inhibition of CYP3A4 by aprepitant could result in elevated plasma concentrations of this drug which is a CYP3A4 substrate, potentially causing serious or life-threatening reactions, such as QT prolongation, a known adverse reaction of pimozide [see Warnings and Precautions ( 5.1 )] .
- Known hypersensitivity to any component of this drug. ( 4 )
- Concurrent use with pimozide. ( 4 )
Overdosage Information for Aprepitant
No specific information is available on the treatment of overdosage. Drowsiness and headache were reported in one patient who ingested 1,440 mg of aprepitant (approximately 11 times the maximum recommended single dose). In the event of overdose, aprepitant should be discontinued and general supportive treatment and monitoring should be provided. Because of the antiemetic activity of aprepitant, drug-induced emesis may not be effective in cases of aprepitant overdosage.
Aprepitant is not removed by hemodialysis.
Clinical Studies of Aprepitant
- 14.1 Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with HEC in Adults Oral administration of aprepitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone (aprepitant regimen) has been shown to prevent acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with HEC including high-dose cisplatin, and nausea and vomiting associated with MEC. In Studies 1 and 2, both multicenter, randomized, parallel, double-blind, controlled clinical studies in adults, aprepitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone was compared with standard therapy (ondansetron and dexamethasone alone) in patients receiving a chemotherapy regimen that included cisplatin greater than 50 mg/m 2 (mean cisplatin dose = 80.2 mg/m 2 ). See Table 13. In these studies, 95% of the patients in the aprepitant group received a concomitant chemotherapeutic agent in addition to protocol-mandated cisplatin. The most common chemotherapeutic agents and the number of aprepitant patients exposed follows: etoposide (106), fluorouracil (100), gemcitabine (89), vinorelbine (82), paclitaxel (52), cyclophosphamide (50), doxorubicin (38), docetaxel (11). Of the 550 patients who were randomized to receive the aprepitant regimen, 42% were women, 58% men, 59% White, 3% Asian, 5% Black, 12% Hispanic American, and 21% Multi-Racial. The aprepitant-treated patients in these clinical studies ranged from 14 to 84 years of age, with a mean age of 56 years. A total of 170 patients were 65 years or older, with 29 patients being 75 years or older. Table 13: HEC Treatment Regimens – Studies 1 and 2* Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 CINV Aprepitant Regimen Oral aprepitant † 125 mg 80 mg 80 mg none Oral Dexamethasone ‡ 12 mg 8 mg 8 mg 8 mg Ondansetron 5-HT 3 antagonist § none none none CINV Standard Therapy Oral Dexamethasone 20 mg 8 mg twice daily 8 mg twice daily 8 mg twice daily Ondansetron 5-HT 3 antagonist § none none none The antiemetic activity of aprepitant was evaluated during the acute phase (0 to 24 hours postcisplatin treatment), the delayed phase (25 to 120 hours post-cisplatin treatment) and overall (0 to 120 hours post-cisplatin treatment) in Cycle 1. Efficacy was based on evaluation of the following endpoints in which emetic episodes included vomiting, retching, or dry heaves: Primary endpoint:
- complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue therapy as recorded in patient diaries) Other prespecified endpoints:
- complete protection (defined as no emetic episodes, no use of rescue therapy, and a maximum nausea visual analogue scale [VAS] score less than 25mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale)
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy)
- no nausea (maximum VAS less than 5 mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale)
- no significant nausea (maximum VAS less than 25 mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale) A summary of the key study results from each individual study analysis is shown in Table 14. In both studies, a statistically significantly higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen in Cycle 1 had a complete response in the overall phase (primary endpoint), compared with patients receiving standard therapy. A statistically significant difference in complete response in favor of the aprepitant regimen was also observed when the acute phase and the delayed phase were analyzed separately. Table 14: Percent of Patients Receiving HEC Responding by Treatment Group and Phase —Cycle 1 Study 1 Study 2 ENDPOINTS Aprepitant Regimen (N=260)* % Standard Therapy (N=261)* % p-Value Aprepitant Regimen (N=261)* % Standard Therapy (N=263)* % p-Value PRIMARY ENDPOINT Complete Response Overall † 73 52 <0.001 63 43 <0.001 OTHER PRESPECIFIED ENDPOINTS Complete Response Acute phase ‡ Delayed phase § 89 75 78 56 <0.001 <0.001 83 68 68 47 <0.001 <0.001 Complete Protection Overall Acute phase Delayed phase 63 85 66 49 75 52 0.001 NS ¶ <0.001 56 80 61 41 65 44 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 No Emesis Overall Acute phase Delayed phase 78 90 81 55 79 59 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 66 84 72 44 69 48 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 No Nausea Overall Delayed phase 48 51 44 48 NS # NS # 49 53 39 40 NS ¶ NS ¶ No Significant Nausea Overall Delayed phase 73 75 66 69 NS # NS # 71 73 64 65 NS # NS # In both studies, the estimated time to first emesis after initiation of cisplatin treatment was longer with the aprepitant regimen, and the incidence of first emesis was reduced in the aprepitant regimen group compared with standard therapy group as depicted in the Kaplan-Meier curves in Figure 1. Figure 1: Percent of Patients Receiving HEC Who Remain Emesis Free Over Time — Cycle 1 Additional Patient-Reported Outcomes: The impact of nausea and vomiting on patients' daily lives was assessed in Cycle 1 of both studies using the Functional Living Index–Emesis (FLIE), a validated nausea- and vomiting-specific patient-reported outcome measure. Minimal or no impact of nausea and vomiting on patients' daily lives is defined as a FLIE total score greater than 108. In each of the 2 studies, a higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen reported minimal or no impact of nausea and vomiting on daily life (Study 1: 74% versus 64%; Study 2: 75% versus 64%). Multiple-Cycle Extension: In the same 2 clinical studies, patients continued into the Multiple-Cycle extension for up to 5 additional cycles of chemotherapy. The proportion of patients with no emesis and no significant nausea by treatment group at each cycle is depicted in Figure 2. Antiemetic effectiveness for the patients receiving the aprepitant regimen was maintained throughout repeat cycles for those patients continuing in each of the multiple cycles. Figure 2: Proportion of Patients Receiving HEC with No Emesis and No Significant Nausea by Treatment Group and Cycle Figure 1 Figure 2 14.2 Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with MEC in Adults Aprepitant was studied in two randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies (Studies 3 and 4) in adult patients receiving MEC. In Study 3, in breast cancer patients, aprepitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone was compared with standard therapy (ondansetron and dexamethasone) in patients receiving a MEC regimen that included cyclophosphamide 750 to 1500 mg/m 2 ; or cyclophosphamide 500 to 1,500 mg/m 2 and doxorubicin (less than or equal to 60 mg/m 2 ) or epirubicin (less than or equal to 100 mg/m 2 ). See Table 15. In this study, the most common combinations were cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin (61%); and cyclophosphamide + epirubicin + fluorouracil (22%). Of the 438 patients who were randomized to receive the aprepitant regimen, 99.5% were women. Of these, approximately 80% were White, 8% Black, 8% Asian, 4% Hispanic, and less than 1% Other. The aprepitant-treated patients in this clinical study ranged from 25 to 78 years of age, with a mean age of 53 years; 70 patients were 65 years or older, with 12 patients being over 74 years. Table 15: MEC Treatment Regimens – Studies 3 and 4* Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 CINV APREPITANT Regimen Oral APREPITANT † 125 mg 80 mg 80 mg Oral Dexamethasone 12 mg ‡ none none Oral Ondansetron 8 mg x 2 doses § none none CINV Standard Therapy Oral Dexamethasone 20 mg ‡ none none Oral Ondansetron 8 mg x 2 doses § 8 mg twice daily 8 mg twice daily The antiemetic activity of aprepitant was evaluated based on the following endpoints in which emetic episodes included vomiting, retching, or dry heaves: Primary endpoint:
- complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue therapy as recorded in patient diaries) in the overall phase (0 to 120 hours post-chemotherapy) Other prespecified endpoints:
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy)
- no nausea (maximum VAS less than 5 mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale)
- no significant nausea (maximum VAS less than 25 mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale)
- complete protection (defined as no emetic episodes, no use of rescue therapy, and a maximum nausea visual analogue scale [VAS] score less than 25 mm on a 0 to 100 mm scale)
- complete response during the acute and delayed phases. A summary of the key results from Study 3 is shown in Table 16. In Study 3, a statistically significantly (p=0.015) higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen (51%) in Cycle 1 had a complete response (primary endpoint) during the overall phase compared with patients receiving standard therapy (42%). The difference between treatment groups was primarily driven by the "No Emesis Endpoint", a principal component of this composite primary endpoint. In addition, a higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen in Cycle 1 had a complete response during the acute (0 to 24 hours) and delayed (25 to 120 hours) phases compared with patients receiving standard therapy; however, the treatment group differences failed to reach statistical significance, after multiplicity adjustments. Table 16: Percent of Patients Receiving MEC Responding by Treatment Group and Phase — Cycle 1 of Study 3 ENDPOINTS Aprepitant Regimen (N=433)* % Standard Therapy (N=424)* % p-Value PRIMARY ENDPOINT † Complete Response 51 42 0.015 OTHER PRESPECIFIED ENDPOINTS † No Emesis 76 59 NS ‡ No Nausea 33 33 NS No Significant Nausea 61 56 NS No Rescue Therapy 59 56 NS Complete Protection 43 37 NS Additional Patient-Reported Outcomes: In Study 3, in patients receiving MEC, the impact of nausea and vomiting on patients' daily lives was assessed in Cycle 1 using the FLIE. A higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen reported minimal or no impact on daily life (64% versus 56%). This difference between treatment groups was primarily driven by the "No Vomiting Domain" of this composite endpoint. Multiple-Cycle Extension: In Study 3, patients receiving MEC were permitted to continue into the Multiple-Cycle extension of the study for up to 3 additional cycles of chemotherapy. The antiemetic effect for patients receiving the aprepitant regimen was maintained during all cycles. In Study 4, aprepitant in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone was compared with a standard therapy (ondansetron and dexamethasone alone) in patients receiving a MEC regimen that included any intravenous dose of oxaliplatin, carboplatin, epirubicin, idarubicin, ifosfamide, irinotecan, daunorubicin, doxorubicin; cyclophosphamide intravenous (less than 1500 mg/m 2 ); or cytarabine intravenous (greater than 1 g/m 2 ). See Table 15. Patients receiving the aprepitant regimen were receiving chemotherapy for a variety of tumor types including 50% with breast cancer, 21% with gastrointestinal cancers including colorectal cancer, 13% with lung cancer and 6% with gynecological cancers. Of the 430 patients who were randomized to receive the aprepitant regimen, 76% were women and 24% were men. The distribution by race was 67% White, 6% Black or African American, 11% Asian, and 12% multiracial. Classified by ethnicity, 36% were Hispanic and 64% were non-Hispanic. The aprepitant-treated patients in this clinical study ranged from 22 to 85 years of age, with a mean age of 57 years; approximately 59% of the patients were 55 years or older with 32 patients being over 74 years. The antiemetic activity of aprepitant was evaluated based on no vomiting (with or without rescue therapy) in the overall period (0 to 120 hours post-chemotherapy) and complete response (defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue therapy) in the overall period. A summary of the key results from Study 4 is shown in Table 17. In Study 4, a statistically significantly higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen (76%) in Cycle 1 had no vomiting during the overall phase compared with patients receiving standard therapy (62%). In addition, a higher proportion of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen (69%) in Cycle 1 had a complete response in the overall phase (0 to 120 hours) compared with patients receiving standard therapy (56%). In the acute phase (0 to 24 hours following initiation of chemotherapy), a higher proportion of patients receiving aprepitant compared to patients receiving standard therapy were observed to have no vomiting (92% and 84%, respectively) and complete response (89% and 80%, respectively). In the delayed phase (25 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy), a higher proportion of patients receiving aprepitant compared to patients receiving standard therapy were observed to have no vomiting (78% and 67%, respectively) and complete response (71% and 61%, respectively). In a subgroup analysis by tumor type, a numerically higher proportion of patients receiving aprepitant were observed to have no vomiting and complete response compared to patients receiving standard therapy. For sex, the difference in complete response rates between the aprepitant and standard regimen groups was 14% in females (64.5% and 50.3%, respectively) and 4% in males (82.2% and 78.2%, respectively) during the overall phase. A similar difference for sex was observed for the no vomiting endpoint. Table 17: Percent of Patients Receiving MEC Responding by Treatment Group — Cycle 1 of Study 4 ENDPOINTS Aprepitant Regimen (N=430)* % Standard Therapy (N=418)* % p-Value No Vomiting Overall 76 62 <0.0001 Complete Response Overall 69 56 0.0003 14.3 Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting Associated with HEC or MEC in Pediatric Patients In a randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled clinical study that included 302 pediatric patients aged 6 months to 17 years receiving HEC or MEC, aprepitant in combination with ondansetron was compared to ondansetron alone (control regimen) for the prevention of CINV (Study 5). Intravenous dexamethasone was permitted as part of the antiemetic regimen in both treatment groups, at the discretion of the physician. A 50% dose reduction of dexamethasone was required for patients in the aprepitant group, reflecting a dosage adjustment to account for a drug interaction [see Clinical Pharmacology ( 12.3 )]. No dexamethasone dose reduction was required for patients who received the control regimen. Eligible patients had documented malignancy at either an original diagnosis or relapse and were scheduled to receive emetogenic chemotherapy or a chemotherapy regimen not previously tolerated due to vomiting along with ondansetron as part of their antiemetic regimen. Of the 152 pediatric patients randomized to receive the aprepitant regimen, 55% were male, 45% female, 78% White, 7% Asian, 0% Black, 24% Hispanic, and 13% Multi-Racial. The most common primary malignancies in subjects receiving the aprepitant regimen were osteosarcoma (11%), Ewing's sarcoma (11%), neuroblastoma (9%) and rhabdomyosarcoma (8%). Other concomitant chemotherapy agents commonly administered and the number of aprepitant patients exposed were: vincristine sulfate (65), etoposide (59), doxorubicin (48), ifosfamide (45), carboplatin (39), and cisplatin (35). The treatment regimens in Study 5 for pediatric patients are defined in Table 18. Of the pediatric patients, 29% in the aprepitant regimen and 28% in the control regimen used dexamethasone as part of the antiemetic regimen in Cycle 1. Table 18: HEC and MEC Treatment Regimens* for Pediatric Patients 6 Months to 17 Years of Age— Study 5 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 CINV Aprepitant Regimen Pediatric Patients 6 Months to less than 12 Years of Age † 3 mg/kg body weight oral suspension 2 mg/kg body weight oral suspension 2 mg/kg body weight oral suspension Pediatric Patients 12 to 17 Years of Age † 125 mg capsule 80 mg capsule 80 mg capsule Ondansetron Per standard of care ‡ none none CINV Control Regimen § Ondansetron Per standard of care ‡ none none The antiemetic activity of aprepitant was evaluated over a 5-day (120 hour) period following the initiation of chemotherapy on Day 1. The primary endpoint in Study 5 was complete response in the delayed phase (25 to 120 hours following chemotherapy) in Cycle 1. Patients had the opportunity to receive open-label aprepitant in subsequent cycles (Optional Cycles 2 to 6); however efficacy was not assessed in these optional cycles. Overall efficacy was based on the evaluation of the following endpoints: Primary endpoint:
- complete response (no vomiting, retching and no use of rescue medication) in the delayed phase (25 to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy) Other prespecified endpoints:
- complete response in the acute phase (0 to 24 hours following initiation of chemotherapy)
- complete response in the overall phase (up to 120 hours following initiation of chemotherapy)
- no vomiting (defined as no emesis, retching or dry heaves, regardless of use of rescue medication) in the overall phase
- safety and tolerability A summary of the key study results are shown in Table 19. Table 19: Percent of Patients Who Responded to Treatment by Treatment Group and Phase – Cycle 1 of Study 5 Aprepitant Regimen n/m (%) Control Regimen n/m (%) PRIMARY ENDPOINT Complete Response * - Delayed phase 77/152 (50.7) † 39/150 (26.0) OTHER PRESPECIFIED ENDPOINTS Complete Response * – Acute phase 101/152 (66.4) ‡ 78/150 (52.0) Complete Response * – Overall phase 61/152 (40.1) † 30/150 (20.0) 14.4 Prevention of PONV in Adults In two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, parallel-group clinical studies (Studies 7 and 8), aprepitant was compared with ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in 1,658 patients undergoing open abdominal surgery. These two studies were of similar design; however, they differed in terms of study hypothesis, efficacy analyses and geographic location. Study 7 was a multinational study including the U.S., whereas, Study 8 was conducted entirely in the U.S. In the two studies, patients were randomized to receive 40-mg aprepitant, 125-mg aprepitant, or 4-mg ondansetron as a single dose. Aprepitant was given orally with 50 mL of water 1 to 3 hours before anesthesia. Ondansetron was given intravenously immediately before induction of anesthesia. A comparison between the aprepitant 125-mg dose did not demonstrate any additional clinical benefit over the 40-mg dose and is not a recommended dosage regimen [see Dosage and Administration ( 2.2 )] . Of the 564 patients who received 40-mg aprepitant, 92% were women and 8% were men; of these, 58% were White, 13% Hispanic American, 7% Multi-Racial, 14% Black, 6% Asian, and 2% Other. The age of patients treated with 40-mg aprepitant ranged from 19 to 84 years, with a mean age of 46.1 years. 46 patients were 65 years or older, with 13 patients being 75 years or older. The antiemetic activity of aprepitant was evaluated during the 0 to 48 hour period following the end of surgery. Efficacy measures in Study 7 included:
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (primary)
- complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (primary)
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 48 hours following the end of surgery (secondary)
- time to first use of rescue medication in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (exploratory)
- time to first emesis in the 0 to 48 hours following the end of surgery (exploratory). A closed testing procedure was applied to control the type I error for the primary endpoints. The results of the primary and secondary endpoints for 40-mg aprepitant and 4-mg ondansetron are described in Table 20: Table 20: Response Rates for Select Efficacy Endpoints (Modified-Intention-to-Treat Population) – Study 7 Treatment n/m (%) Aprepitant vs. Ondansetron ∆ Odds ratio * Analysis PRIMARY ENDPOINTS No Vomiting 0 to 24 hours (Superiority) (no emetic episodes) Aprepitant 40 mg 246/293 (84.0) 12.6% 2.1 P<0.001 † Ondansetron 200/280 (71.4) Complete Response (Non-inferiority: If LB ‡ >0.65) (no emesis and no rescue therapy, 0 to 24 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 187/293 (63.8) 8.8% 1.4 LB=1.02 Ondansetron 154/280 (55.0) Complete Response (Superiority: If LB >1.0) (no emesis and no rescue therapy, 0 to 24 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 187/293 (63.8) 8.8% 1.4 LB=1.02 ‡ Ondansetron 154/280 (55.0) SECONDARY ENDPOINT No Vomiting 0 to 48 hours (Superiority) (no emetic episodes) Aprepitant 40 mg 238/292 (81.5) 15.2% 2.3 P<0.001 § Ondansetron 185/279 (66.3) In Study 7, the use of aprepitant did not affect the time to first use of rescue medication when compared to ondansetron. However, compared to the ondansetron group, use of aprepitant delayed the time to first vomiting, as depicted in Figure 3. Figure 3: Percent of Patients Who Remain Emesis Free During the 48 Hours Following End of Surgery – Study 7 Efficacy measures in Study 8 included:
- complete response (defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (primary)
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (secondary)
- no use of rescue therapy in the 0 to 24 hours following the end of surgery (secondary)
- no emesis (defined as no emetic episodes regardless of use of rescue therapy) in the 0 to 48 hours following the end of surgery (secondary). Study 8 failed to satisfy its primary hypothesis that aprepitant is superior to ondansetron in the prevention of PONV as measured by the proportion of patients with complete response in the 24 hours following end of surgery. The study demonstrated that 40-mg aprepitant had a clinically meaningful effect with respect to the secondary endpoint "no vomiting" during the first 24 hours after surgery and was associated with a 16% improvement over ondansetron for the no vomiting endpoint. Table 21: Response Rates for Select Efficacy Endpoints (Modified-Intention-to-Treat Population) – Study 8 Treatment n/m (%) Aprepitant vs. Ondansetron ∆ Odds ratio * Analysis PRIMARY ENDPOINT Complete Response (no emesis and no rescue therapy, 0 to 24 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 111/248 (44.8) 2.5% 1.1 0.61 Ondansetron 104/246 (42.3) SECONDARY ENDPOINTS No Vomiting (no emetic episodes, 0 to 24 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 223/248 (89.9) 16.3% 3.2 <0.001 † Ondansetron 181/246 (73.6) No Use of Rescue Medication (for established emesis or nausea, 0 to 24 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 112/248 (45.2) -0.7% 1.0 0.83 Ondansetron 113/246 (45.9) No Vomiting 0 to 48 hours (Superiority) (no emetic episodes, 0 to 48 hours) Aprepitant 40 mg 209/247 (84.6) 17.7% 2.7 <0.001* Ondansetron 164/245 (66.9) Figure 3
Drug information sourced from the FDA. This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a healthcare professional before making any medication decisions.
Ready to save on Aprepitant?
Compare prescription prices at over 70,000 pharmacies and start saving today—no enrollment required.
Compare Aprepitant Prices