Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30412271›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical pharmacology2019

Complementary Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Netupitant and Palonosetron Support the Rationale for Their Oral Fixed Combination for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting.

James Gilmore, Alberto Bernareggi

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A phase 2 pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic dose-finding study of oral NEPA for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients with cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Evaluation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in low, moderate, and highly emetogenic schemes between sexes.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Observational
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Discovery of COVID-19 Inhibitors Targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Nsp13 Helicase.The journal of physical chemistry letters · 2020
    Article
  15. Discovery of COVID-19 Inhibitors Targeting the SARS-CoV2 Nsp13 Helicase.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

James GilmoreGeorgia Cancer Specialists PC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Alberto BernareggiClinical Research & Development, Helsinn Healthcare SA, Lugano, Switzerland.
Georgia Cancer Specialists · USHelsinn (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

NEPA is the first fixed-combination antiemetic composed of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist netupitant (netupitant; 300 mg) and the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist palonosetron (palonosetron; 0.50 mg). This study evaluated the pharmacokinetic profiles of netupitant and palonosetron. The pharmacokinetic profiles of both drugs were summarized using data from phase 1-3 clinical trials. netupitant and palonosetron have high absolute bioavailability (63%-87% and 97%, respectively). Their overall systemic exposures and maximum plasma concentrations are similar under fed and fasting conditions. netupitant binds to plasma proteins in a high degree (>99%), whereas palonosetron binds to a low extent (62%). Both drugs have large volumes of distribution (cancer patients: 1656-2257 L and 483-679 L, respectively). netupitant is metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A4 to 3 major pharmacologically active metabolites (M1, M2, and M3). palonosetron is metabolized by cytochrome P450 2D6 to 2 major substantially inactive metabolites (M4 and M9). Both drugs have similar intermediate-to-low systemic clearances and long half-lives (cancer patients: netupitant, 19.5-20.8 L/h and 56.0-93.8 hours; palonosetron: 7.0-11.3 L/h and 43.8-65.7 hours, respectively). netupitant and its metabolites are eliminated via the hepatic/biliary route (87% of the administered dose), whereas palonosetron and its metabolites are mainly eliminated via the kidneys (85%-93%). Altogether, these data explain the lack of pharmacokinetic interactions between netupitant and palonosetron at absorption, binding, metabolic, or excretory level, thus highlighting their compatibility as the oral fixed combination NEPA, with administration convenience that may reduce dosing mistakes and increase treatment compliance.

Indexed as

AntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsBenzeneacetamidesBiological AvailabilityClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDrug CombinationsHumansNauseaNeoplasmsNeurokinin-1 Receptor AntagonistsPalonosetronPiperazinesPyridinesVomitingAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsBenzeneacetamidesDrug CombinationsnetupitantNeurokinin-1 Receptor AntagonistsPalonosetronPiperazinesPyridinescomplementary profilesnetupitantpalonosetronpharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID30412271
PMCPMC6587462
OpenAlexW2900387869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.