Acute emesis: moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

Certified nurse specialists in cancer nursing and prophylactic antiemetic prescription for chemotherapy patients

PURPOSE

The prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), a common chemotherapy side effect, should be attempted by oncology nurses. Certified nurses could be certified nurse specialists in cancer nursing (CNSCNs), who have high-level graduate education, or certified nurses in cancer chemotherapy nursing (CNCCNs), who have short-term training. The relationship between these certifications and compliance with the CINV prevention guidelines has not been investigated. We aimed to evaluate the association between certified nurse staffing and prescription of prophylactic antiemetic drugs for chemotherapy patients with high emetic risk.

METHODS

We used health service utilisation data for cancer patients diagnosed in 2016 from 474 hospitals nationwide in Japan and a list of certified nurses published by the Japanese Nurse Association. Patients receiving highly emetic chemotherapy were included. A multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression analysis was conducted to estimate the prescription of prophylactic antiemetic drugs associated with CNSCN and/or CNCCN staffing.

RESULTS

Data of 46,306 patients were analysed. Overall, 68.4% and 94.0% of the patients received chemotherapy at hospitals with CNSCNs and CNCCNs, respectively. Small cell lung cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer, and oesophageal cancer were positively associated with the prescription of recommended antiemetic drugs. CNSCNs was significantly associated with the prescription of prophylactic antiemetic drugs, while CNCCNs was positively but non-significantly associated with antiemetic prescriptions.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to demonstrate that CNSCN placement was significantly associated with prescribing antiemetic drugs recommended by clinical guidelines. Patients are likely to receive appropriate supportive care with the proper placement of CNSCNs.

Real-world emetic risk of chemotherapy and the corresponding antiemetic therapy in Japan: A study based on a nationwide database

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major concern of patients with cancer, leading to suboptimal treatment.

AIM

This study assessed the emetic risk associated with intravenous and oral chemotherapy and the prophylactic antiemetic drugs by cancer type in a real-world setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used the health services utilisation data for patients with cancer diagnosed in 2016. Patients aged at least 20 years at the time of diagnosis and who started their first course of chemotherapy were included. The emetic risk of chemotherapy was determined according to the cancer type and was classified based on clinical practice guidelines. The prescription of antiemetic drugs was assessed. Overall, 172 133 patients were evaluated, of whom 121 103 (70.4%) received intravenous chemotherapy. High-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) was prescribed in 46 458 (27.0%) patients. HEC was prescribed most for patients with oesophageal cancer (80.3%), followed by malignant lymphoma (60.2%) and breast cancer (53.8%). Moderate-emetic-risk chemotherapy (MEC) was prescribed in 60 528 (35.2%) patients and was mostly prescribed for small cell lung cancer (59.9%). Meanwhile, more than 50% of the chemotherapy prescribed for patients with gastric, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer was low-emetic-risk chemotherapy. HEC was accompanied by three-drug antiemetic prophylaxis in more than 90% of patients with small cell lung, non-small cell lung, breast, and oesophageal cancer, whereas only 13.5% of patients with malignant lymphoma were administered CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine sulphate, and prednisolone) with prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

The risk of CINV differs with cancer type. HEC was less prescribed compared with MEC. Most patients received the recommended anti-emetic prophylaxis.

The efficacy and safety of auricular acupuncture versus electroacupuncture in ameliorating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among patients receiving cisplatin-based regimens

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are among the most common and distressing side effects of chemotherapy. Difference in views about the effectiveness of auricular acupuncture (AA) versus electroacupuncture (EA) of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) lies at the heart of the debate. The aim of this study is to compare the antiemetic efficacy and safety of AA and EA for CINV.

METHODS

One hundred twenty participants, 18 to 75 years old malignant tumors will receiving chemotherapy with cisplatin, will be recruited and randomized into 3 groups equally, Group A (the AA group), Group B (the EA group), and Group C (the control group). The participants in Group A and Group B will receive AA or EA regimens, alternatively, beginning on the day before first day of chemotherapy for a third consecutive cycles. All participants will continue to receive conventional treatment. The incidence and severity of CINV will be assessed using the definition and classification of nausea and vomiting (NCI-CTC AE4.0) and the MASCC (Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer) Antiemesis Tool (MAT). Secondary outcome measures include the degree of abdominal distension, the first time of flatus and defecation, and life quality. Additionally, adverse events will also be documented during the period of the treatment.

DISCUSSION

This trial may provide evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness and safety of AA versus EA for CINV following cisplatin-based regimens.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000040942.

Acupuncture therapy for preventing the nausea and vomiting following high emetic risk chemotherapy: A protocol for systematic review and Bayesian Network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are the most common complications after chemotherapy, which cannot be completely controlled even with commonly prescribed antiemetic drugs, particularly in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy Acupuncture therapy is an effective replacement method for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), which effectiveness and safety have been observed by many clinicians. However, different acupuncture treatments have various effectiveness. Based on enough clinical researches, the study aims to uses Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the effectiveness of different acupuncture therapies used for preventing CINV.

METHODS

Authors will search PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Ebsco, Ovid/Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, and China Biology Medicine from setup time to July 2020. All randomized control trails meet the standard will be included. Quality evaluation of included studies will be implemented with Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. STATA 14.0 will be used to perform pairwise meta-analysis. Addis 1.16.8 (University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Groningen, NL) and OpenBUGS 3.2.3 (Medical Research Council (MRC), London, UK) will be used to conduct NMA.

RESULTS

The results of this review will generate a comprehensive review of current evidence and be published on a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSION

The result of this systematic review and Bayesian NMA may offer better options for patients in relieving CINV.Systematic review registration number: INPLASY202070070.

A Phase II single-arm trial of palonosetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in malignant glioma patients receiving multidose irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab

Purpose

Given that the prognosis of recurrent malignant glioma (MG) remains poor, improving quality of life (QoL) through symptom management is important. Meta-analyses establishing antiemetic guidelines have demonstrated the superiority of palonosetron (PAL) over older 5-hydroxytryptamine 3-receptor antagonists in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention, but excluded patients with gliomas. Irinotecan plus bevacizumab is a treatment frequently used in MG, but is associated with low (55%) CINV complete response (CR; no emesis or use of rescue antiemetic) with commonly prescribed ondansetron. A single-arm Phase II trial was conducted in MG patients to determine the efficacy of intravenous PAL (0.25 mg) and dexamethasone (DEX; 10 mg) received in conjunction with biweekly irinotecan–bevacizumab treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects achieving acute CINV CR (no emesis or antiemetic ≤24 hours postchemotherapy). Secondary end points included delayed CINV CR (days 2–5), overall CINV CR (days 1–5), and QoL, fatigue, and toxicity.

Materials and methods

A two-stage design of 160 patients was planned to differentiate between CINV CR of 55% and 65% after each dose of PAL–DEX. Validated surveys assessed fatigue and QoL.

Results

A total of 63 patients were enrolled, after which enrollment was terminated due to slow accrual; 52 patients were evaluable for the primary outcome of acute CINV CR. Following PAL–DEX dose administrations 1–3, acute CINV CR rates were 62%, 68%, and 70%; delayed CINV CR rates were 62%, 66%, and 70%, and overall CINV CR rates were 47%, 57%, and 62%, respectively. Compared to baseline, there was a clinically meaningful increase in fatigue during acute and overall phases, but not in the delayed phase. There were no grade ≥3 PAL–DEX treatment-related toxicities.

Conclusion

Data suggest that PAL–DEX is effective in preventing CINV in MG patients, which ultimately maintains the QoL of patients with glioma.

Change in bone mineral density during adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Purpose

Adjuvant chemotherapy has been associated with loss of bone mineral density (BMD) either as a direct effect or due to glucocorticoids used as supportive care medication. A prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate changes in BMD from baseline to right after completion of chemotherapy, i.e., 4 months.

Methods

Dual-imaging X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was performed at baseline and after completing anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy to measure BMD in the spine, hip, and forearm in early-stage breast cancer patients. High-dose prednisolone was used at three weekly intervals to reduce nausea and vomiting. Patients were advised a daily calcium/vitamin D supplement. Linear regression was used to assess mean percentage change in BMD and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) according to doses of prednisolone, menopausal status, smoking, and BMI.

Results

Eight patients were excluded: seven because of initiation of bisphosphonate treatment due to osteoporosis at baseline, and one had non-interpretable DXA. The final cohort included 97 patients with a mean age of 53 years (range 34–72). Mean cumulative prednisolone dose was 1308 mg (95 % CI 1255; 1362). BMD increased 1.36 % (95 % CI 0.7; 2.0, p < 0.001) in the spine and 1.27 % (95 % CI 0.9; 1.7, p < 0.001) in the hip. Forearm BMD did not change. Postmenopausal women had increases in spine BMD of 2.35 % (95 % CI 1.1; 3.6, p < 0.001) compared to premenopausal women. The spine BMD of current smokers decreased 1.67 % (95 % CI −3.3; −0.1, p = 0.04) compared to never/former smokers.

Conclusions

Adjuvant chemotherapy supplemented with prednisolone was not associated with loss of BMD. Postmenopausal women gained bone mass, whereas current smokers lost bone mass.

Efficacy of palonosetron and ramosetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting related to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with opioids after gynecological laparoscopic surgery (double-blinded prospective randomized controlled trial)

PURPOSE

The study was designed to assess the efficacy of palonosetron and ramosetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) related to intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with opioids after gynecological laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Patients were randomly allocated to 4 groups-C, P, R0.3 and RPCA. At the end of surgery, group C received an infusion of 50 ml normal saline, group P received palonosetron 75 μg mixed in 50 ml normal saline, and groups R0.3 and RPCA received ramosetron 0.3 mg mixed in 50 ml normal saline. A PCA pump containing fentanyl was connected for all groups; however, ramosetron 0.6 mg was mixed with the PCA regimen for the RPCA group. PONV and postoperative pain were assessed.

RESULTS

PONV incidence and scale, and Rhodes index in RPCA group between 24 and 72 h after discharge from the post-anesthetic care unit (PACU) showed significantly lower values, compared with the other groups. PONV incidence and scale, and Rhodes index in P group and R0.3 group were lower than the corresponding values in C group at all times, without statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

A single dose of palonosetron 75 μg or ramosetron 0.3 mg was unable to prevent PONV related to IV PCA with opioids in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery. The combination of a single dose of ramosetron 0.3 mg, followed by ramosetron 0.6 mg mixed with PCA, significantly decreased PONV compared with a single dose of palonosetron 75 μg or ramosetron 0.3 mg.

QoL evaluation of olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting comparing with 5-HT3 receptor antagonist

This study evaluated the efficacy of olanzapine in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and improving the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cancer during chemotherapy. Two hundred twenty-nine patients with cancer who received chemotherapy from January 2008 to August 2008 were enrolled, and they were randomised to receive olanzapine or a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. The patients completed a CINV questionnaire once daily on days 1-5 and a QoL questionnaire on days 0 and 6. The complete response (CR) rates for nausea (76.85% versus 46.2%) and vomiting (84.3% versus 67.6%) were significantly higher in the olanzapine group than in the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist group for delayed CINV but not for acute CINV. The CR rates for nausea (76.85% versus 44.44%) and vomiting (85.95% versus 67.59%) were also significantly higher in the olanzapine group for the 5 days post-chemotherapy. After chemotherapy, global health status, emotional functioning, and insomnia were improved in the olanzapine group but worsened in the 5-HT3 receptor antagonist group, whereas cognitive functioning and appetite loss were unchanged. Moreover, olanzapine significantly improved global health status, emotional functioning, social functioning, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, insomnia, and appetite loss. Olanzapine improved the QoL of patients with cancer during chemotherapy, in part by reducing the incidence of delayed CINV.

Supportive care during treatment for breast cancer: resource allocations in low- and middle-income countries. A Breast Health Global Initiative 2013 consensus statement

Breast cancer patients may have unmet supportive care needs during treatment, including symptom management of treatment-related toxicities, and educational, psychosocial, and spiritual needs. Delivery of supportive care is often a low priority in low- and middle-income settings, and is also dependent on resources available. This consensus statement describes twelve key recommendations for supportive care during treatment in low- and middle-income countries, identified by an expert international panel as part of the 5th Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) Global Summit for Supportive Care, which was held in October 2012, in Vienna, Austria. Panel recommendations are presented in a 4-tier resource-stratified table to illustrate how health systems can provide supportive care services during treatment to breast cancer patients, starting at a basic level of resource allocation and incrementally adding program resources as they become available. These recommendations include: health professional and patient and family education; management of treatment related toxicities, management of treatment-related symptoms of fatigue, insomnia and non-specific pain, and management of psychosocial and spiritual issues related to breast cancer treatment. Establishing supportive care during breast cancer treatment will help ensure that breast cancer patients receive comprehensive care that can help 1) improve adherence to treatment recommendations, 2) manage treatment-related toxicities and other treatment related symptoms, and 3) address the psychosocial and spiritual aspects of breast cancer and breast cancer treatments.

Current pharmacotherapy for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Nausea and vomiting are two of the most frequent and troubling side effects patients experience during chemotherapy, interfering with compliance with cancer therapies and quality of life. While newly available treatments have improved our ability to manage nausea and vomiting, anticipatory and delayed nausea and vomiting are still major problems for patients receiving chemotherapy. Many cancer patients consider delaying future chemotherapy cycles and some contemplate stopping chemotherapy altogether because of their fear of experiencing further nausea and vomiting.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the pathopsychophysiology of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), the recommended guidelines for treatment, and current agents in late-stage clinical trials, and future research needs to address the continued challenges of treatment-related nausea and vomiting.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite advances in pharmaceutical and behavioral therapies, and the provision of standard clinical guidelines for effectively managing CINV, patients continue to experience it. Moreover, control of nausea, acute and delayed, and anticipatory nausea and vomiting remains an important, unmet need among cancer patients. It is critical to focus attention on better understanding the mechanisms underlying nausea, anticipatory symptoms and delayed symptoms.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and the role of neurokinin 1 inhibitors: from guidelines to clinical practice in solid tumors

A significant proportion of cancer patients experience nausea or vomiting during the course of their disease, either because of the cancer itself or because of the treatment received. Highly or moderately emetogenic drugs are part of the standard chemotherapy regimens frequently used in patients with lung cancer, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and several other common solid tumors. In this review, we describe the impact of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy, and the main progress achieved in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with the introduction of neurokinin 1 inhibitors. The adherence to existing guidelines is particularly important to avoid suboptimal prophylaxis and maximize patients' outcome. This review is focused on lung, breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer, which are among the solid tumors characterized by a numeric and clinical relevance of the chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting issue because of the wide use of highly and/or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens.

Common Symptoms and Distress Experienced Among Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Qualitative part of Mixed Method Design

Background :

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of tumour in the world. Treatment side effects, together with the tumour symptoms, can result in a ‘symptom burden’. To understand the patient’s burden during chemotherapy treatment and plan effective symptom relief there is a need for more knowledge about the experience of symptoms from the patients’ perspective.

Objectives :

The study was designed to qualitatively identify and describe the most common symptoms among patients treated for colorectal cancer, and discover whether there are barriers to reporting symptoms.

Methods :

Thirteen Swedish patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer and treated with chemotherapy were interviewed face-to-face. The interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were analysed by following the principles of qualitative content analysis.

Results :

Nine symptoms/forms of distress were identified. Those most frequently expressed were fatigue, changed bowel habits, and affected mental well-being, closely followed by nausea, loss of appetite and neurological problems. Of particular note were the affected mental well-being, the magnitude of the neurological problems described, the symptoms related to skin and mucous membrane problems, and the reports of distressing pain. Barriers to symptom control were only expressed by the patients in passing and very vaguely.

Conclusion :

This study confirms other reports on most common symptoms in colorectal cancer. It also highlights the early onset of symptoms and provides data on less well-studied issues that warrant further study, namely affected mental well-being, the magnitude of the neurological problems and symptoms related to the skin and mucous membranes. Nurses need to be sensitive to the patients’ need presented and not only noting symptoms/distresses they have guidelines for.

Treatment of Nausea and Vomiting During Chemotherapy

Nausea and vomiting are two of the most troubling side effects patients experience during chemotherapy. While newly available treatments have improved our ability to manage nausea and vomiting, anticipatory and delayed nausea and vomiting are still a major problem for patients receiving chemotherapy. Many cancer patients will delay or refuse future chemotherapy treatments and contemplate stopping chemotherapy altogether because of their fear of experiencing further nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the patho-psychophysiology of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and the recommended guidelines for treatment.