Fosnetupitant
(Synonyms: 福奈妥匹坦,Pronetupitant) 目录号 : GC64711
Fosnetupitant (Pronetupitant) 是 Netupitant 的亚甲基磷酸前体药物。Fosnetupitant (Pronetupitant) 对人 NK1 受体的 pKi 值为 9.5。
Cas No.:1703748-89-3
Sample solution is provided at 25 µL, 10mM.
;)
,-1-7$$$37316672.jpg');)
;)
;)
$$$36806353.jpg');)
;33(7)%EF%BC%9A546-561$$$37156877.jpg');)
;)
;)
;)
%201124-1138.$$$35908550.jpg');)
%20766-780.$$$37100057.jpg');)
%20418-432.$$$36893736.jpg');)
%EF%BC%9A-240-255.$$$35108512.jpg');)
533-545$$$36543525.jpg');)
%201-13.$$$36600053.jpg');)
;)
Quality Control & SDS
- View current batch:
- Purity: >95.00%
- COA (Certificate Of Analysis)
- SDS (Safety Data Sheet)
- Datasheet
Fosnetupitant (Pronetupitant) a methylene phosphate prodrug of Netupitant. Fosnetupitant (Pronetupitant) exhibits a pKi of 9.5 for human NK1 receptor[1].
Fosnetupitant (Pronetupitant) displays micromolar affinity for the 5-HT6 (pKi ∼ 5.2) receptor and type L Ca2+ channels (pKi ∼ 5.7) and does not bind all the other proteins investigated[1].
Pronetupitant is rapidly and extensively converted to Netupitant after i.v. injection in rats[1].
[1]. Ruzza C, et al. In vitro and in vivo pharmacological characterization of Pronetupitant, a prodrug of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist Netupitant. Peptides. 2015 Jul;69:26-32.
| Cas No. | 1703748-89-3 | SDF | Download SDF |
| 别名 | 福奈妥匹坦,Pronetupitant | ||
| 分子式 | C31H35F6N4O5P | 分子量 | 688.6 |
| 溶解度 | 储存条件 | Store at -20°C, protect from light, stored under nitrogen | |
| General tips | 请根据产品在不同溶剂中的溶解度选择合适的溶剂配制储备液；一旦配成溶液，请分装保存，避免反复冻融造成的产品失效。 储备液的保存方式和期限：-80°C 储存时，请在 6 个月内使用，-20°C 储存时，请在 1 个月内使用。 为了提高溶解度，请将管子加热至37℃，然后在超声波浴中震荡一段时间。 |
||
| Shipping Condition | 评估样品解决方案：配备蓝冰进行发货。所有其他可用尺寸：配备RT，或根据请求配备蓝冰。 | ||
| 制备储备液 | |||
 |
1 mg | 5 mg | 10 mg |
| 1 mM | 1.4522 mL | 7.2611 mL | 14.5222 mL |
| 5 mM | 0.2904 mL | 1.4522 mL | 2.9044 mL |
| 10 mM | 0.1452 mL | 0.7261 mL | 1.4522 mL |
| 第一步：请输入基本实验信息（考虑到实验过程中的损耗，建议多配一只动物的药量） | ||||||||||
| 给药剂量 | mg/kg |  |
动物平均体重 | g | |
每只动物给药体积 | ul | |
动物数量 | 只 |
| 第二步：请输入动物体内配方组成（配方适用于不溶于水的药物；不同批次药物配方比例不同，请联系GLPBIO为您提供正确的澄清溶液配方） | ||||||||||
| % DMSO % % Tween 80 % saline | ||||||||||
| 计算重置 | ||||||||||
计算结果:
工作液浓度： mg/ml；
DMSO母液配制方法： mg 药物溶于 μL DMSO溶液（母液浓度 mg/mL，
体内配方配制方法：取 μL DMSO母液，加入 μL PEG300，混匀澄清后加入μL Tween 80，混匀澄清后加入 μL saline，混匀澄清。
1. 首先保证母液是澄清的；
2.
一定要按照顺序依次将溶剂加入，进行下一步操作之前必须保证上一步操作得到的是澄清的溶液，可采用涡旋、超声或水浴加热等物理方法助溶。
3. 以上所有助溶剂都可在 GlpBio 网站选购。
Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study of Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: CONSOLE
J Clin Oncol 2022 Jan 10;40(2):180-188.PMID:34793245DOI:10.1200/JCO.21.01315.
Purpose: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of Fosnetupitant (FosNTP) versus fosaprepitant (FosAPR) for preventing highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. This phase III study was the first head-to-head comparison between two different neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists in combination with palonosetron and dexamethasone. Patients and methods: Patients scheduled to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to FosNTP 235 mg or FosAPR 150 mg in combination with palonosetron 0.75 mg and dexamethasone. The primary end point was overall (0-120 hours) complete response (CR; no emetic event and no rescue medication) rate, stratified by sex and age category, to show the noninferiority of FosNTP to FosAPR (noninferiority margin, -10% for the difference in the overall CR rate). Results: Overall, 795 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 785 received the study drug (FosNTP [N = 392] v FosAPR [N = 393]) and were evaluated for efficacy and safety. The overall CR rate was 75.2% versus 71.0%, respectively (Mantel-Haenszel common risk difference, 4.1%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 10.3%), demonstrating noninferiority of FosNTP to FosAPR. The CR rates in the acute (0-24 hours), delayed (24-120 hours), and beyond delayed (120-168 hours) phases, and at 0-168 hours were 93.9% versus 92.6%, 76.8% versus 72.8%, 86.5% versus 81.4%, and 73.2% versus 66.9%, respectively. The incidence rates of treatment-related adverse events with FosNTP versus FosAPR were 22.2% versus 25.4%, whereas adverse events or treatment-related adverse events relevant to injection site reactions were 11.0% versus 20.6% (P < .001) and 0.3% versus 3.6% (P < .001), respectively. Conclusion: FosNTP demonstrated noninferiority to FosAPR, with a favorable safety profile and lower risk for injection site reactions. Thus, FosNTP is valuable in the prophylaxis of acute, delayed, and beyond delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.
A phase 3 safety study of Fosnetupitant as an antiemetic in patients receiving anthracycline and cyclophosphamide: CONSOLE-BC
Cancer 2022 Apr 15;128(8):1692-1698.PMID:35045185DOI:10.1002/cncr.34088.
Background: Fosnetupitant (FosNTP), an intravenous neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist, demonstrated a favorable safety profile with a potentially low risk of injection site reactions (ISRs) and promising antiemetic efficacy in patients receiving cisplatin-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy in a previous phase 2 study. We conducted a randomized, double-blind safety study to evaluate the safety profile of FosNTP, including ISRs, in patients receiving doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide or epirubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC/EC) chemotherapy. Methods: Patients scheduled to receive AC/EC were randomized 1:1 to receive 235 mg of FosNTP or 150 mg of fosaprepitant (FosAPR), both in combination with 0.75 mg of intravenous palonosetron and 9.9 mg of dexamethasone on day 1. The stratification factors were age category (<55 vs ≥55 years) and study site. The primary end point was the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) with FosNTP. Results: Overall, 102 patients were randomized to FosNTP (n = 52) or FosAPR (n = 50), and all were treated with the study drug and evaluated for safety. The primary end point, the incidence of TRAEs, was similar with FosNTP (21.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.1%-34.7%) and FosAPR (22.0%; 95% CI, 11.5%-36.0%), with any-cause ISRs observed in 5.8% and 26.0% of patients, respectively, and treatment-related ISRs observed in 0% and 10.0%, respectively. The overall (0-120 hour) complete response (defined as no emetic event and no rescue medication) rate, standardized by age category in the full analysis set, was 45.9% (23 of 51 patients) with FosNTP and 51.3% (25 of 49 patients) with FosAPR. Conclusions: FosNTP demonstrated a favorable safety profile with a very low risk of ISRs in the AC/EC setting.
Fosnetupitant for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Short Review and Clinical Perspective
Adv Ther 2023 Mar 8.PMID:36884027DOI:10.1007/s12325-023-02474-5.
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is often ranked by patients as one of the most distressing and feared consequences of chemotherapy. The novel neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist Fosnetupitant, a phosphorylated prodrug formulation of netupitant, was approved in Japan in 2022. Fosnetupitant is one of the standard treatments for the prevention of CINV in patients who are receiving highly (any treatment where CINV occurs in more than 90% of patients) or moderately (where CINV occurs in 30-90% of patients) emetogenic chemotherapies. The aim of this commentary is to describe the mechanism of action, tolerability, and antiemetic efficacy of single-agent Fosnetupitant in the prevention of CINV, and to discuss its clinical application, in order to aid optimal use.
Netupitant/Palonosetron: A Review in Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting
Drugs 2021 Jul;81(11):1331-1342.PMID:34292534DOI:10.1007/s40265-021-01558-2.
Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA; Akynzeo®), available in oral and intravenous (IV) formulations, is a fixed-dose combination of the neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonist netupitant (or the prodrug, Fosnetupitant, in the IV formulation) and the second-generation serotonin 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist palonosetron. Administered as a single dose, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron (in combination with dexamethasone) is indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adults. In clinical trials, (fos)netupitant/palonosetron plus dexamethasone was associated with high complete response rates (no emesis and no rescue medication) in the acute, delayed and overall phases in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, with efficacy maintained over multiple cycles. Further, oral netupitant/palonosetron was found to be superior to palonosetron and non-inferior to aprepitant plus granisetron in preventing CINV in individual trials. Both the oral and IV formulations of the drug combination are well tolerated. The fixed-dose combination is concordant with guideline recommendations and provides a simple and convenient option for prophylaxis against acute and delayed CINV in patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.
Exploratory Analysis Comparing Fosnetupitant Versus Fosaprepitant for Prevention of Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study (CONSOLE)
Oncol Ther 2022 Jun;10(1):253-262.PMID:35246827DOI:10.1007/s40487-022-00188-2.
Introduction: We describe the results of an exploratory analysis performed on the first head-to-head study (JapicCTI-194611) comparing two different intravenous (IV) neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists, Fosnetupitant and fosaprepitant, in combination with palonosetron (PALO) and dexamethasone (DEX) for the prevention of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This analysis was performed to validate the findings of the primary analysis (previously published) utilizing a last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach for missing values for the efficacy endpoint of complete response (no emetic event and no rescue medication), while also evaluating the time periods encompassing the 0-168-hour (h) "extended overall phase" interval. Methods: Patients scheduled to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to Fosnetupitant 235 mg or fosaprepitant 150 mg in combination with PALO 0.75 mg and DEX. Complete response rates were calculated and compared (stratified by age category and sex with a Mantel-Haenszel test) during the study's primary overall phase (0-120 h) and during additional time intervals of interest [acute (0-24 h), delayed (24-120 h), extended delayed (> 24-168 h), beyond delayed (120-168 h), and extended overall (0-168 h)]. Results: A total of 785 patients were included (Fosnetupitant N = 392, fosaprepitant N = 393). Complete response rates were numerically higher for Fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant for all time intervals and statistically significant for the extended overall phase. Complete response rates for Fosnetupitant versus fosaprepitant during the overall, acute, delayed, extended delayed, beyond delayed, and extended overall phases were 75.5% vs. 71.0% (p = 0.1530), 93.9% vs. 92.6% (p = 0.4832), 77.0% vs. 72.8% (p = 0.1682), 74.7% vs. 68.4% (p = 0.0506), 86.7% vs. 81.7% (p = 0.0523), and 73.5% vs. 66.9% (p = 0.0450), respectively. Conclusion: In this exploratory analysis, Fosnetupitant appeared to be more effective than fosaprepitant in preventing CINV associated with cisplatin-based HEC during the extended 7-day period following chemotherapy. INFOGRAPHIC.