Oral THC:CBD cannabis extract for refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase II crossover trial.

Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Antiemetics / therapeutic use Antineoplastic Agents / therapeutic use Australia Cannabidiol / therapeutic use Cannabis Cross-Over Studies Double-Blind Method Dronabinol / therapeutic use Drug Combinations Female Humans Male Middle Aged Nausea / chemically induced Plant Extracts / therapeutic use Vomiting / chemically induced

antiemetic cannabidiol cannabis chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting randomised trial

Journal

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology

ISSN: 1569-8041

Titre abrégé: Ann Oncol

Pays: England

ID NLM: 9007735

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020

Historique:

received: 13 06 2020

revised: 14 07 2020

accepted: 27 07 2020

pubmed: 18 8 2020

medline: 7 1 2021

entrez: 18 8 2020

Statut: ppublish

Résumé

This multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase II/III trial aimed to evaluate an oral THC:CBD (tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol) cannabis extract for prevention of refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Here we report the phase II component results. Eligible patients experienced CINV during moderate-to-high emetogenic intravenous chemotherapy despite guideline-consistent antiemetic prophylaxis. Study treatment consisted of one cycle of 1-4 self-titrated capsules of oral THC 2.5 mg/CBD 2.5 mg (TN-TC11M) three times daily, from days -1 to 5, and 1 cycle of matching placebo in a crossover design, then blinded patient preference for a third cycle. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with complete response during 0-120 h from chemotherapy. A total of 80 participants provided 80% power to detect a 20% absolute improvement with a two-sided P value of 0.1. A total of 81 participants were randomised; 72 completing two cycles were included in the efficacy analyses and 78 not withdrawing consent were included in safety analyses. Median age was 55 years (range 29-80 years); 78% were female. Complete response was improved with THC:CBD from 14% to 25% (relative risk 1.77, 90% confidence interval 1.12-2.79, P = 0.041), with similar effects on absence of emesis, use of rescue medications, absence of significant nausea, and summary scores for the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). Thirty-one percent experienced moderate or severe cannabinoid-related adverse events such as sedation, dizziness, or disorientation, but 83% of participants preferred cannabis to placebo. No serious adverse events were attributed to THC:CBD. The addition of oral THC:CBD to standard antiemetics was associated with less nausea and vomiting but additional side-effects. Most participants preferred THC:CBD to placebo. Based on these promising results, we plan to recruit an additional 170 participants to complete accrual for the definitive, phase III, parallel group analysis. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001036404; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370473&isReview=true.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients experienced CINV during moderate-to-high emetogenic intravenous chemotherapy despite guideline-consistent antiemetic prophylaxis. Study treatment consisted of one cycle of 1-4 self-titrated capsules of oral THC 2.5 mg/CBD 2.5 mg (TN-TC11M) three times daily, from days -1 to 5, and 1 cycle of matching placebo in a crossover design, then blinded patient preference for a third cycle. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with complete response during 0-120 h from chemotherapy. A total of 80 participants provided 80% power to detect a 20% absolute improvement with a two-sided P value of 0.1.

RESULTS

A total of 81 participants were randomised; 72 completing two cycles were included in the efficacy analyses and 78 not withdrawing consent were included in safety analyses. Median age was 55 years (range 29-80 years); 78% were female. Complete response was improved with THC:CBD from 14% to 25% (relative risk 1.77, 90% confidence interval 1.12-2.79, P = 0.041), with similar effects on absence of emesis, use of rescue medications, absence of significant nausea, and summary scores for the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). Thirty-one percent experienced moderate or severe cannabinoid-related adverse events such as sedation, dizziness, or disorientation, but 83% of participants preferred cannabis to placebo. No serious adverse events were attributed to THC:CBD.

CONCLUSION

The addition of oral THC:CBD to standard antiemetics was associated with less nausea and vomiting but additional side-effects. Most participants preferred THC:CBD to placebo. Based on these promising results, we plan to recruit an additional 170 participants to complete accrual for the definitive, phase III, parallel group analysis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001036404; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370473&isReview=true.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.07.020 PMID: 32801017

pubmed: 32801017

pii: S0923-7534(20)39996-8

doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.07.020

pii:

doi:

Substances chimiques

Antiemetics 0

Antineoplastic Agents 0

Drug Combinations 0

Plant Extracts 0

TN-TC11M 0

Cannabidiol 19GBJ60SN5

Dronabinol 7J8897W37S

Types de publication

Clinical Trial, Phase II Clinical Trial, Phase III Journal Article Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Pagination

1553-1560

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Disclosure PG: Research funding to institution—ASLAN Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Boston Biomedical (Inst), Eisai (Inst), Eisai (Inst), Five Prime (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), Halozyme (Inst), Medimmune, MSD (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Specialised Therapeutics, Tigermed (Inst), Tilray (Inst), Zucero. MS: Research funding to institution—Amgen (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Bionomics (Inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Medivation (Inst), Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Roche (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Tilray (Inst); Travel, Accommodations, Expenses—Medivation/Pfizer. NL: Consulting or Advisory Role—Camurus, Indivior, Mundipharma; Speakers' Bureau—PCM Healthcare Ltd; Research funding to institution—Camurus (Inst). AM: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses—Roche. AT: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses—Ipsen. JS: Research funding to institution—AbbVie (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Merck Serono (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Roche (Inst). RM: Research funding to institution—Edwards Life Sciences (Inst). IO: Consulting or Advisory Role—Aucentra, Con Ca Pty Ltd, VieCure; Speakers' Bureau—Pierre Fabre (Inst). IM: Honoraria—Janssen; Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property—Kinoxis Therapeutics. CG: Honoraria—Novotech; Consulting or Advisory Role—AbbVie (Inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Ipsen (Inst), Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst), Novotech, Pfizer (Inst); Research funding to institution—Amgen (Inst), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst); Travel, Accommodations, Expenses—Astellas Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme. SC: Employment—GenesisCare; Stock and Other Ownership Interests—GenesisCare; Honoraria—Tetra Health; Consulting or Advisory Role—All Vascular, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Ipsen, Merck; Speakers' Bureau—Merck, Novartis/Ipsen; Travel, Accommodations, Expenses—Bristol-Myers Squibb, MedLab. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest.