A Pragmatic Study Evaluating NEPA Versus Aprepitant for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Background: Neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonists (RAs), administered in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃) RA and dexamethasone (DEX), have demonstrated clear improvements in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention over a 5-HT₃RA plus DEX. However, studies comparing the NK₁RAs in the class are lacking. A fixed combination of a highly selective NK₁RA, netupitant, and the 5-HT₃RA, palonosetron (NEPA), simultaneously targets two critical antiemetic pathways, thereby offering a simple convenient antiemetic with long-lasting protection from CINV. This study is the first head-to-head NK₁RA comparative study in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Materials and Methods: This was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, single-cycle, open-label, prospective study designed to demonstrate noninferiority of single-dose NEPA to a 3-day aprepitant regimen in preventing CINV in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving AC/non-AC MEC in a real-life setting. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (no emesis/no rescue) during the overall (0–120 hour) phase. Noninferiority was achieved if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference between NEPA and the aprepitant group was greater than the noninferiority margin set at −10%. Results: Noninferiority of NEPA versus aprepitant was demonstrated (risk difference 9.2%; 95% CI, −2.3% to 20.7%); the overall complete response rate was numerically higher for NEPA (64.9%) than aprepitant (54.1%). Secondary endpoints also revealed numerically higher rates for NEPA than aprepitant. Conclusion: This pragmatic study in patients with cancer receiving AC and non-AC MEC revealed that a single dose of oral NEPA plus DEX was at least as effective as a 3-day aprepitant regimen, with indication of a potential efficacy benefit for NEPA. Implications for Practice: In the absence of comparative neurokinin 1 (NK₁) receptor antagonist (RA) studies, guideline committees and clinicians consider NK₁RA agents to be interchangeable and equivalent. This is the first head-to-head study comparing one NK₁RA (oral netupitant/palonosetron [NEPA]) versus another (aprepitant) in patients receiving anthracycline cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Noninferiority of NEPA versus the aprepitant regimen was demonstrated; the overall complete response (no emesis and no rescue use) rate was numerically higher for NEPA (65%) than aprepitant (54%). As a single-dose combination antiemetic, NEPA not only simplifies dosing but may offer a potential efficacy benefit over the current standard-of-care.