Adherence to antiemetic guidelines in patients with malignant glioma: a quality improvement project to translate evidence into practice

Overview of premedication prescription and intake in an oncology day hospital: What do we need to change to improve patient management?

BACKGROUND

Premedication of cancer therapy against nausea and vomiting (NV) and hypersensitivity reaction (HS) is essential for good patient management. However, this prescription is not always optimal. Today, as a large part of cancer therapies are administered in day hospitals (DH), premedication taken on the day of the cancer treatment is injected as a 30-min infusion.

OBJECTIVE

To assess compliance with recommendations for premedication prescription and intake; to analyse patient attitude about switching to exclusively oral forms taken at home.

METHOD

The study is conducted in the medical oncology DH of a French Hospital from 17 January to 25 February 2022. The data collection is carried out as an individual interview, associated with the distribution of two questionnaires. Data are coupled with the premedication set up on our software and the last medical report. Intakes are considered optimal when recommendations, tolerance, background, and adherence of the patient are taken into account.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included for interviews. Regarding software prescriptions, our configuration was consistent with recommendations in 100% of cases for HS and 37% for NV. Intakes were compliant in 51.4% of cases, non-compliant in 17.1% and debatable in 31.5%. Disparities between the practices of different physicians were identified. Regarding the feasibility of oral substitution, it could concern 63.5% of patients.

CONCLUSION

This work makes it possible to improve the management of all patients and to make the operation of the care unit more fluid.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential

PURPOSE

Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2016 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of low and minimal emetic potential.

METHODS

A working group performed a systematic literature review using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases between June 2015 and January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of low or minimal emetic potential. A consensus committee reviewed recommendations and required a consensus of 67% or greater and a change in outcome of at least 10%.

RESULTS

Of 293 papers identified, 15 had information about managing systemic cancer treatment regimens of low or minimal emetic potential and/or compliance with previous management recommendations. No new evidence was reported that would change the current MASCC recommendations. No antiemetic prophylaxis is recommended for minimal emetic potential therapy, and single agents recommended for low emetic potential chemotherapy for acute emesis, but no prophylaxis is recommended for delayed emesis. Commonly, rescue medication includes antiemetics prescribed for the next higher level of emesis.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient data to change the current guidelines. Future studies should seek to more accurately determine the risk of emesis with LEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy to include patient-related risk assessment.

Translation of Evidence-Based Interventions Into Oncology Care Settings: An Integrative Review

BACKGROUND

Adoption of evidence remains slow, leading to variations in practices and quality of care. Examining evidence-based interventions implemented within oncology settings can guide knowledge translation efforts.

OBJECTIVE

This integrative review aimed to (1) identify topics implemented for oncology-related evidence-based practice (EBP) change; (2) describe frameworks, guidelines, and implementation strategies used to guide change; and (3) evaluate project quality.

METHODS

PubMed and CINAHL were searched to identify published practice change projects. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines were followed. Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted; content analysis was conducted. The Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set guided quality assessment.

RESULTS

Topics included infection control/prevention (n = 18), pain/palliative care (n = 13), psychosocial assessment (n = 11), and medication adherence (n = 8). Among the projects, Plan, Do, Study, Act (n = 8) and Lean Six Sigma (n = 6) frameworks were used most. Thirty-six projects identified guidelines that directed interventions. Multiple implementation strategies were reported in all articles with planning, education, and restructuring the most common. Reach, sustainability, and ability to be replicated were identified as quality gaps across projects.

CONCLUSION

The EBP topics that emerged are consistent with the oncology nursing priorities, including facilitating integration of EBP into practice. The studies identified used national guidelines and implementation strategies to move evidence into practice. Heterogeneity in measurement made synthesis of findings difficult across studies, although individual studies showed improvement in patient outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Development of an interprofessional oncology consortium could facilitate a standardized approach to implementation of high-priority topics that target improved patient outcomes, harmonize measures, and accelerate translation of evidence into practice.

Adherence to Prophylactic Anticonvulsant Guidelines for Newly Diagnosed Brain Tumor Patients: A Quality Improvement Study

Background and Purpose

Clinical guidelines suggest that prophylactic antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) should be given to newly diagnosed seizure-naive brain tumor patients for up to 1 week after craniotomy. Yet, data suggest that prophylactic AEDs are used up to 12 months after surgery. A quality improvement project was implemented to improve adherence to evidence-based prophylactic AED guidelines.

Methods

A quasi-experimental, pre- and post-test intervention design was used to assess the effect of a multiphase intervention on guideline adherence and prophylactic anticonvulsant prescription rates. The 16-week intervention consisted of provider education sessions, provider alerts, documentation templates, and a weekly audit and feedback. Participants included four providers and newly diagnosed seizure-naive brain tumor patients. Measures included guideline adherence rates and AED prescription rates extracted from chart review, and a provider attitude and knowledge survey. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and Chi-square tests.

Results

Guideline adherence increased significantly (p < .01) from 4 months before implementation (15.8%) to 1 year before implementation (27.8%) and then to 93.3% after implementation. Provider knowledge showed clinically meaningful decreases in the likelihood to prescribe prophylactic AEDs (-.5 point) and increased understanding of prophylactic AED side effects (+0.5 point), although these were not statistically significant (p = .083). Finally, prophylactic AED prescription rates decreased by 2.2% (p = .119) compared with 4 months and 1 year before implementation (2.6%; p = .072).

Conclusion

This project highlights the important role of provider education, provider alerts, a documentation template, and audit and feedback in improving guideline adherence rate. Findings suggest that the combination intervention and weekly audit and feedback strategy can improve guideline adherence to prophylactic anticonvulsant use in seizure-naive newly diagnosed brain tumor patients.

Implications

By following prophylactic AED guideline recommendations, clinicians can avoid the potential side effects of anticonvulsant-induced cognitive, behavioral, and psychiatric issues that can impair patients' quality of life.

Methods of Capturing Process Outcomes in Quality Improvement Trials: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Healthcare quality can be measured by studying structure, processes, and outcomes. This study examines how trialists capture process outcomes in implementation trials to provide guidance for researchers and health professionals. Electronic databases were searched, and two researchers performed the title, abstract, and full-text selection. Only implementation studies involving nonpharmacological approaches were included. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy and completeness by a second reviewer. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers. Of the 3,186 articles screened, 24 studies matched our inclusion criteria. Most studies were cluster randomized control trials, followed by interrupted time series studies and stepped wedge studies. The population in the studies was diverse and settings included hospitals, community centers, residential aged care facilities, and primary care. The reporting of process measures across the included studies varied, and there was limited information about the mechanisms of data collection procedures. Nineteen studies extracted information about processes from electronic medical records, patient records, or chart reviews. The remaining five studies used staff surveys. Challenges remain in the practical aspect of data collection for measuring process outcomes, particularly outside of hospital settings or where processes are hard to capture in patient records.

Mobile Applications in Clinical and Perioperative Care for Anesthesia: Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

The increasing use of smartphones by providers and patients alike demonstrates that digital health utilizing mobile applications has the potential to transform perioperative care and education in anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

This literature review describes the current scope of the use of mobile applications in anesthesiology.

METHODS

Literature was searched using PubMed, Scopus, and clinicaltrials.gov for articles published from January 1, 2010, through April 1, 2020. Only English language studies were included. Articles were included if they examined the use of a mobile health application in the setting of anesthesia or the perioperative (immediate preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) period. Studies were excluded if they explored video interventions or did not examine the feasibility or efficacy of the mobile app.

RESULTS

We included 29 articles, and three areas of clinical functionality were identified: patient-centered care (preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative), systems-based improvement, and medical education. Several studies demonstrate the feasibility and reliability of mobile apps in these areas, but many are only tested for efficacy in simulated environments or with small patient samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobile health applications show promise in improving communication between anesthesiologists, improving workflow efficiency, enhancing medical education, and reducing hospital costs. However, there is a need for validation and improvement before full implementation by the provider, patients, and hospital systems. Future studies are needed to demonstrate meaningful health outcomes to create guidelines and recommendations specific to the application of mobile technology to health care.

Creation of a chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting dashboard to improve outcomes for pediatric cancer patients

PURPOSE

Two of the most common acute side effects of chemotherapy are nausea and vomiting. Nausea and vomiting impact quality of life, nutritional status, and ability to tolerate further chemotherapy. Parents of pediatric oncology patients rank nausea as one of the most bothersome treatment-related symptoms.

METHODS

Utilizing Quality Improvement methodology, we developed a dashboard interface to facilitate extraction of data from the electronic medical record (EMR), which is presented via a visual display that summarizes the type of chemotherapy and antiemetic medications, use of as needed medications, and number of episodes of emesis.

RESULTS

This dashboard interface allows for rapid and efficient identification of patients whose antiemetic regimen is mismatched for the emetogenicity of ordered chemotherapy, thus providing a timely opportunity to modify the antiemetic regimen based on published guidelines before administration of chemotherapy drugs. It also allows measurement of the effectiveness of the antiemetic regimen in terms of the number of break through emesis and the need for as needed medications.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel CINV dashboard was created, which visually conveys complex information about antiemetics, chemotherapy emetogenicity, as needed medications, and breakthrough vomiting for inpatient pediatric oncology patients.

Randomized open-label phase II trial of 5-day aprepitant plus ondansetron compared to ondansetron alone in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea-vomiting (CINV) in glioma patients receiving adjuvant temozolomide

PURPOSE

CINV remains a distressing side effect experienced by glioma patients receiving multi-day temozolomide therapy, in spite of guideline-based antiemetic therapy with selective serotonin-receptor-antagonists. Antiemetic research with aprepitant has routinely excluded glioma patients. In this randomized open-label phase II study, use of a nonstandard 5-day regimen of aprepitant for glioma patients was investigated.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-six glioma patients receiving their first cycle of adjuvant temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2/day × 5 days every 28 days) were randomized to Arm-A (ondansetron 8 mg days 1-5 with aprepitant day 1: 125 mg, days 2-5: 80 mg) or Arm-B (ondansetron). Randomization was stratified by tumor grade and number of prior chemotherapy regimens. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving complete control (CC), defined as no emetic episode or antiemetic rescue medication over the 7-day study period. Secondary endpoints included CINV efficacy in the acute phase (≤ 24 h) and delayed phase (days 2-7), as well as safety and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

Patients were 61% male, 97% white, 48% with KPS > 90%, 60% non-smokers, mean age 54, 92% with low alcohol use, and 46% with a CINV history. The CC was 58.6% (Arm-A) and 54.5% (Arm-B). Acute-complete response (CR) rates, defined as CC on day 1 in Arm-A and -B, were 97.1% and 87.9%, respectively (p = 0.056). Treatment-related toxicities were mild or moderate in severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant plus ondansetron may increase acute-CR, may have benefit regarding CINV's effect on QoL, and is safe for 5-day temozolomide compared to ondansetron. This study provides no evidence that aprepitant increases CC rate over ondansetron alone.

Evaluation of antiemetic practices for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): results of a European oncology nurse survey

INTRODUCTION

Preventing CINV is possible when guideline-recommended antiemetics are used. Because oncology nurses play a critical role in risk assessment and management of CINV, a survey of European nurses was conducted to evaluate antiemetic practices, assess awareness of and adherence to current guideline recommendations, and explore barriers to adherence.

METHODS

From March 2016 to Feb 2017, 212 oncology nurses in 16 European countries completed a 20-question online survey.

RESULTS

Respondents had 15-year (median) oncology nursing experience, and most (75%) were able to suggest or prescribe antiemetics. Most (80%) worked in the public not-for-profit hospital setting. Guideline awareness was generally low with nurses most familiar with ASCO (46%) and MASCC/ESMO (40%) guidelines; individual institution guidelines were most commonly used (47%). Key discrepancies between reported antiemetic use and guideline recommendations in the highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) setting were underutilization of the recommended NK₁RA + 5-HT₃RA + steroid combination on day 1 (55%) and high use of 5-HT₃RAs (50%) on days 2-5 when a steroid (63% use) should be used. Metoclopramide use was high in both HEC and moderately emetogenic settings, with ~ 30% and ~ 50% reporting use on day 1 and days 2-5, respectively. The most common reported barrier to use of guideline-recommended agents was physician preference (40%). The most common challenges in managing CINV were "controlling nausea/vomiting in the delayed phase" (64%) and "reducing the impact of CINV on patients' quality-of-life" (61%).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey highlights opportunities to improve utilization of guideline-recommended antiemetics, thereby optimizing prevention of CINV and QoL for patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy.

Adherence to pediatric acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting guidelines in Canadian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) impacts quality of life for patients. Guidelines for emetogenicity classification and prevention of CINV in children were recently published and endorsed by pediatric oncology organizations.

PROCEDURE

A multicenter chart review was performed at four Canadian pediatric oncology centers examining rates of prescribing adherence to CINV guidelines between January 2012 and December 2015. Eligible patients received their first chemotherapy course of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).

RESULTS

Guideline adherence was described in 204 patients as antiemetic-only guideline adherence (AGA; examined medication/class prescribed only) and complete guideline adherence (CGA; examined medication/class, dose, frequency, and duration prescribed). Adherence was 29% (HEC 30%, MEC 19%, P = 0.1) and 2% for AGA and CGA patients, respectively. Vomiting in the first 24 h was experienced by 24% of AGA and 34% of non-AGA patients (P = 0.13), with mean breakthrough medication doses similar between AGA and non-AGA groups (HEC 1.8 vs 1.5, P = 0.45; MEC 3 vs 1.42, P = 0.35). In the first 24 h, HEC AGA patients achieved a complete control rate of 37% vs 45% for non-AGA patients (P = 0.31), while patients receiving AGA therapy for MEC achieved a complete control rate of 80% vs 24% for non-AGA patients (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to guidelines was low across all four pediatric institutions. Each center used different approaches to implement pediatric CINV guidelines. Complete CINV control was low, with reports of emesis high, indicating that patients are not receiving optimal treatment.

The compliance with antiemetic guidelines of Turkish medical oncologists. A survey study of Turkish Oncology Group

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the compliance of Turkish Medical Oncologists to antiemetic guidelines for treatment of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving high (HEC), moderate (MEC), and low (LEC) emetogenic chemotherapy.

METHOD

A covering electronic mail letter with an online questionnaire link was sent to e-mail and mobile application groups including all 599 members of the Turkish Society of Medical Oncology in January 2018. The online survey has consisted of twelve questions.

RESULTS

Questionnaire form was responded by 146 of Turkish Medical Oncologists. The most of the participants were following up more than one antiemetic guideline (53%). While compliance with the antiemetic guidelines was higher in acute CINV prophylaxis for HEC and MEC, it was significantly lower in the delayed CINV treatment of HEC and LEC. The highest and lowest compliance rate was found in the prophylaxis of acute and delayed CINV of HEC (92% and 15%, respectively). The incidence of noncompliance for delayed CINV in HEC was statistically significantly higher in those who worked for ≤ five years in an oncology department, under 39 years of age, and non-academicians (p = 0.004, p = 0.042, p = 0.005, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Noncompliance with the antiemetic guidelines is continue to be a big problem in Turkish Medical Oncologists. The use of standardized antiemetic protocols in chemotherapy order forms or a computerized decision-support system is now seen as a better tool to enhance compliance with the guidelines.

Promoting Evidence-Based Practice at a Primary Stroke Center: A Nurse Education Strategy

BACKGROUND

Promoting a culture of evidence-based practice within a health care facility is a priority for health care leaders and nursing professionals; however, tangible methods to promote translation of evidence to bedside practice are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to design and implement a nursing education intervention demonstrating to the bedside nurse how current evidence-based guidelines are used when creating standardized stroke order sets at a primary stroke center, thereby increasing confidence in the use of standardized order sets at the point of care and supporting evidence-based culture within the health care facility.

METHODS

This educational intervention took place at a 286-bed community hospital certified by the Joint Commission as a primary stroke center. Bedside registered nurse (RN) staff from 4 units received a poster presentation linking the American Heart Association's and American Stroke Association's current evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to standardized stroke order sets and bedside nursing care. The 90-second oral poster presentation was delivered by a graduate nursing student during preshift huddle. The poster and supplemental materials remained in the unit break room for 1 week for RN viewing. After the pilot unit, a pdf of the poster was also delivered via an e-mail attachment to all RNs on the participating unit. A preintervention online survey measured nurses' self-perceived likelihood of performing an ordered intervention based on whether they were confident the order was evidence based. The preintervention survey also measured nurses' self-reported confidence in their ability to explain how the standardized order sets are derived from current evidence. The postintervention online survey again measured nurses' self-reported confidence level. However, the postintervention survey was modified midway through data collection, allowing for the final 20 survey respondents to retrospectively rate their confidence before and after the educational intervention. This modification ensured that the responses for each individual participant in this group were matched.

RESULTS

Registered nurses reported a significant increase in perceived confidence in ability to explain how standardized stroke order sets reflect current evidence after the intervention (n = 20, P < .001). This sample was matched for each individual respondent. No significant change was shown in unmatched group mean self-reported confidence ratings overall after the intervention or separately by unit for the progressive care unit, critical care unit, or intensive care unit (n = 89 preintervention, n = 43 postintervention). However, the emergency department demonstrated a significant increase in group mean perceived confidence scores (n = 20 preintervention, n = 11 postintervention, P = .020). Registered nurses reported a significantly higher self-perceived likelihood of performing an ordered nursing intervention when they were confident that the order was evidence based compared with if they were unsure the order was evidence based (n = 88, P < .001).

DISCUSSION

This nurse education strategy increased RNs' confidence in ability to explain the path from evidence to bedside nursing care by demonstrating how evidence-based clinical practice guidelines provide current evidence used to create standardized order sets. Although further evaluation of the intervention's effectiveness is needed, this educational intervention has the potential for generalization to different types of standardized order sets to increase nurse confidence in utilization of evidence-based practice.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and adherence to antiemetic guidelines: results of a survey of oncology nurses

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be prevented in most patients with use of guideline-recommended antiemetic regimens. However, studies have suggested that adherence to antiemetic guidelines is suboptimal. Oncology nurses, as part of a multidisciplinary team, can help promote appropriate antiemetic prophylaxis. Therefore, nurses were surveyed to assess antiemetic guideline awareness and practice patterns of antiemetic use, determine adherence to guideline recommendations, and query barriers to adherence.

METHODS

In September 2015, 531 US-based oncology nurses participated in an online survey administered and analyzed by ONS:Edge.

RESULTS

Nurses were most familiar with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (73%) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (48%) antiemetic guidelines. While most (77%) felt that antiemetics prescribed were consistent with guideline recommendations, practice patterns of antiemetic use revealed low adherence to those guidelines, particularly during the delayed (25-120 h) phase following highly emetogenic chemotherapy, where only 25% of nurses reported administration of guideline-recommended agents. Overutilization of phenothiazines and benzodiazepines was common. Only 17% of respondents reported that most (> 75%) of their patients have CINV optimally controlled; 39% reported between 6 and 20% of patients have an alteration in their chemotherapy due to CINV, and reports of emergency department/hospital visits due to poorly controlled CINV were high. The predominant barrier interfering guideline-recommended antiemetic prophylaxis was reported as physician preference (71%).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey revealed an opportunity to increase awareness of antiemetic guidelines and a critical need to address barriers interfering with utilization of guideline-recommended antiemetic agents in order to optimize CINV control for patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy.

Stability of azasetron-dexamethasone mixture for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting administration

Combination antiemetic therapy has become common practice for the prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by anticancer drugs. In this study, we investigated the stability of azasetron hydrochloride 0.1 mg/mL plus dexamethasone sodium phosphate 0.05, 0.1, or 0.2 mg/mL in 0.9% sodium chloride injection and stored in polyolefin bags and glass bottles over a period of 14 days at 4°C and 48 hours at 25°C. The stability studies were evaluated by visual inspection, pH measurement, and a high-pressure liquid chromatography assay of drug concentrations. During the study period, the concentration of each drug in the various solutions remained above 97% of the initial concentration at both 4°C and 25°C when protected from room light. Under the condition of 25°C with exposure to room light, the concentrations of both drugs were significantly lowered over 48 hours. The pH value decreased, and the color changed from colorless to pink. Our study demonstrates that the azasetron-dexamethasone mixture at a clinically relevant concentration seems to be stable for 48 hours at 25°C and for 14 days at 4°C when packaged in polyolefin bags or glass bottles and protected from room light. The room light is the main influential factor on stability. Clinicians should be aware that combinations of azasetron hydrochloride and dexamethasone sodium phosphate in solution with light exposure should be avoided.

Adherence to guidelines on prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the National Cancer Institute, Sudan

<strong>Objective</strong>: To evaluate the adherence to American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines for antiemetic prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and assess the outcomes of the prescribed antiemetic drugs.<br /> <strong>Methods</strong>: This prospective, observational study enrolled chemotherapy-naive cancer patients who were admitted to the National Cancer Institute between May and July 2015 for intravenous chemotherapy. Patient’s demographic data, chemotherapy protocols and types of antiemetic drugs were collected by reviewing patients’ files, chemotherapy prescription forms and interviewing the patients.<br /> <strong>Results</strong>: The data revealed that 90% of pre-chemotherapy antiemetic prescriptions did not adhere to antiemetic guidelines. The trends of non-adherence included an overuse of ondansetron (14%), under-prescribing of dexamethasone (16%) and corticosteroid duplication (14%). Regarding antiemetic use for the prevention of delayed emesis, the data showed that 90% of antiemetic prescriptions were non-adherent with ASCO guidelines, with overuse of ondansetron (20%) and metoclopramide (37%) and lack of dexamethasone prescriptions (80%) on days 2 and 3 being the most frequently reported trends. The percentage of patients with complete response (no emesis or rescue therapy) over 5 days post chemotherapy was 36%.<br /> <strong>Conclusion</strong>: The study indicated an extremely low adherence rate to ASCO guidelines for antiemetic prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Non-adherence included a trend of both underuse and overuse of indicated antiemetic medications.

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.

NEPA, a fixed oral combination of netupitant and palonosetron, improves control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) over multiple cycles of chemotherapy: results of a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial versus oral palonosetron

Purpose

Antiemetic guidelines recommend co-administration of targeted prophylactic medications inhibiting molecular pathways involved in emesis. NEPA is a fixed oral combination of a new NK₁ receptor antagonist (RA), netupitant (NETU 300 mg), and palonosetron (PALO 0.50 mg), a pharmacologically distinct 5-HT₃ RA. NEPA showed superior prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) compared with oral PALO in a single chemotherapy cycle; maintenance of efficacy/safety over continuing cycles is the objective of this study.

Methods

This study is a multinational, double-blind study comparing a single oral dose of NEPA vs oral PALO in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving anthracycline/cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy along with dexamethasone 12 mg (NEPA) or 20 mg (PALO) on day 1. The primary efficacy endpoint was delayed (25–120 h) complete response (CR: no emesis, no rescue medication) in cycle 1. Sustained efficacy was evaluated during the multicycle extension by calculating the proportion of patients with overall (0–120 h) CR in cycles 2–4 and by assessing the probability of sustained CR over multiple cycles.

Results

Of 1455 patients randomized, 1286 (88 %) participated in the multiple-cycle extension for a total of 5969 cycles; 76 % completed ≥4 cycles. The proportion of patients with an overall CR was significantly greater for NEPA than oral PALO for cycles 1–4 (74.3 vs 66.6 %, 80.3 vs 66.7 %, 83.8 vs 70.3 %, and 83.8 vs 74.6 %, respectively; p ≤ 0.001 each cycle). The cumulative percentage of patients with a sustained CR over all 4 cycles was also greater for NEPA (p < 0.0001). NEPA was well tolerated over cycles.

Conclusions

NEPA, a convenient, guideline-consistent, fixed antiemetic combination is effective and safe over multiple cycles of chemotherapy.

Clinical Practices and Outcomes on Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Management in South Korea: Comparison with Asia-Pacific Data of the Pan Australasian Chemotherapy Induced Emesis Burden of Illness Study

Purpose

This study reported patient outcomes of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis for highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimens and evaluated its adherence to acute-phase CINV prophylaxis in the Korean population subset of the Pan Australasian Chemotherapy Induced Emesis burden of illness (PrACTICE) study.

Materials and Methods

This subgroup analysis evaluated 158 Korean patients receiving HEC or MEC and compared the data (wherever possible) with that of 648 patients from the Asia-Pacific (AP) region. Study endpoints included evaluation of primary CINV prophylaxis and adherence to acute-phase CINV prophylaxis in cycle 1 (American Society of Clinical Oncology [ASCO] Quality Oncology Practice Initiative [QOPI]).

Results

In South Korea and the AP, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5HT₃-RA) prophylaxis for the acute phase was administered to 79/80 patients (98.8%) for HEC and 70/71 patients (98.6%) for MEC regimens (QOPI-1). Triple regimen (corticosteroid–5HT₃-RA–neurokinin 1-RA) was initiated in 46/80 patients (57.5%) for prophylaxis of acute CINV in cycle 1 of HEC (QOPI-3). Double regimen (corticosteroid–5HT₃-RA, with or within NK₁-RA) was initiated in 61/71 patients (83.1%) for control of acute CINV in cycle 1 of MEC a(QOPI-2).

Conclusion

Active management of CINV is necessary in cycle 1 of HEC in South Korea, despite higher rates than the AP region. Adherence to the international guidelines for CINV prophylaxis requires attention in the acute phase in cycle 1 of the HEC regimen.

A Smartphone-based Decision Support Tool Improves Test Performance Concerning Application of the Guidelines for Managing Regional Anesthesia in the Patient Receiving Antithrombotic or Thrombolytic Therapy

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) consensus statement on regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy is the standard for evaluation and management of these patients. The authors hypothesized that an electronic decision support tool (eDST) would improve test performance compared with native physician behavior concerning the application of this guideline.

METHODS

Anesthesiology trainees and faculty at 8 institutions participated in a prospective, randomized trial in which they completed a 20-question test involving clinical scenarios related to the ASRA guidelines. The eDST group completed the test using an iOS app programmed to contain decision logic and content of the ASRA guidelines. The control group completed the test by using any resource in addition to the app. A generalized linear mixed-effects model was used to examine the effect of the intervention.

RESULTS

After obtaining institutional review board's approval and informed consent, 259 participants were enrolled and randomized (eDST = 122; control = 137). The mean score was 92.4 ± 6.6% in the eDST group and 68.0 ± 15.8% in the control group (P < 0.001). eDST use increased the odds of selecting correct answers (7.8; 95% CI, 5.7 to 10.7). Most control group participants (63%) used some cognitive aid during the test, and they scored higher than those who tested from memory alone (76 ± 15% vs. 57 ± 18%, P < 0.001). There was no difference in time to completion of the test (P = 0.15) and no effect of training level (P = 0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

eDST use improved application of the ASRA guidelines compared with the native clinician behavior in a testing environment.

Palonosetron in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving multiple-day chemotherapy

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a key component of treatment for patients with cancer. Guidelines are available to assist prescribers in the management of CINV associated with single-day chemotherapy regimens. However, currently there are no clear guidelines for management of CINV in patients receiving multiple-day chemotherapy regimens. Serotonin (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists are a mainstay in preventing CINV, and palonosetron, given its longer half-life and duration of action relative to other 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, may be a useful option for managing CINV in multiple-day chemotherapy. Here we provide an overview of CINV and CINV treatment options, with a focus on palonosetron. We describe existing challenges in managing CINV, and discuss two patients receiving multiple-day chemotherapy, in whom CINV was managed successfully with palonosetron.

Addressing the value of novel therapies in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a troubling side effect of cancer treatment and is often poorly controlled. As a consequence, CINV is associated with substantially increased costs of care and significant interference with patients' lives. Inadequate control over CINV results from factors that include failure to provide guideline-adherent prophylactic medication and limitations in available therapies. Newer serotonin receptor antagonists, such as palonosetron, and addition of neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists to treatment have significantly decreased both acute and delayed CINV. A fixed-dose combination of palonosetron and a new NK-1 receptor, netupitant, is significantly superior to palonosetron alone and has small, but consistent, numerical advantages over aprepitant plus palonosetron for prevention of CINV. The combination of a serotonin receptor antagonist plus an NK-1 receptor antagonist has been shown to be cost-effective for prevention of CINV and the availability of a fixed-dose combination of netupitant and palonosetron may enhance this benefit.