2016 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: Controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential

Research trends on chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting: a bibliometric analysis

Background

CINV is a frequent adverse response to cancer treatment. There is still much to learn about the pathophysiology and initiating event of CINV, which necessitates continued research despite decades of effort. Identifying the current foci of the complex disease and assessing the scientific impact of pertinent study are made more difficult by the abundance of publications on CINV. Therefore, our goals in this article are to evaluate developments in this field, examine patterns in research domains, and gauge the expansion of CINV research production globally.

Methods

Articles about CINV published between 2012 and 2022 were found by searching the Web of Science Core Collection of Clarivate Analytics. The number of publications over time was visualized using Microsoft Office Excel 2019. CiteSpace and VOSviewer were utilized to create knowledge maps that analyzed collaborations between nations, organizations, and writers. They also presented the history of CINV research and highlighted its current areas of focus.

Results

In this study, 846 papers in all were assessed. Most publications (237, 28.01%) came from the United States. University of Toronto was the most productive institution (34, 4.01%). With 25 articles published, or 2.96% of the total, Aapro Matti published the most. The most frequently published journal was found to be Supportive Care (158, 18.68%). "Palonosetron," "Moderately emetogenic chemotherapy," "5-HT3 receptor antagonist," and "Neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists" were considered the hot topics. It can be seen that the research focus is on the drug treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Conclusion

Through bibliometric analysis, we were able to gain profound insights into CINV research for the first time. Researchers looking to uncover research frontiers and comprehend important information in this discipline may find the study's findings useful.

Ageing-related considerations for medication used in supportive care in cancer

Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies have shown that a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) prior to a patient commencing systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) results in improved quality of life outcomes and is associated with a decreased risk of grade 3-5 toxicity; however, data are lacking in relation to adverse drug events (ADE) associated with supportive care medications. Supportive care medications are prescribed as prophylactic agents in a SACT regimen, for management of treatment related toxicity and for symptoms caused by the disease itself. While necessary, the commencement of SACT and supportive medications may cause, or exacerbate, a significant drug burden in older patients, some of whom may have existing comorbidities. For many medications, older adults are underrepresented in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling studies. In this article we will review ageing-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, as well as how these changes may impact supportive care medications. Additional considerations for prescribing these medications in older adults with cancer, such as polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications, drug-drug interactions, and anticholinergic burden, as well as ageing-related considerations and recommendations for supportive care medications commonly used in older adults with cancer are also reviewed.

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.

Nutritional Management of Oncological Symptoms: A Comprehensive Review

Throughout their experience of illness and during the course of treatment, a substantial proportion of cancer patients are prone to develop nutritional and/or metabolic disturbances. Additionally, cancer patients often encounter long-term side effects from therapies, which may lead to impaired digestion, nutrient absorption or bowel motility. Therefore, the preservation and maintenance of an optimal and balanced nutritional status are pivotal to achieving a better prognosis, increasing the tolerance and adherence to cancer therapies and improving the overall quality of life. In this context, personalized nutritional programs are essential for addressing conditions predisposing to weight loss, feeding difficulties, digestion problems and intestinal irregularity, with the goal of promoting adequate nutrient absorption and minimizing the detrimental effects of treatment regimens. The focus of this research is to examine the most common clinical conditions and metabolic changes that cancer patients may experience, including stomatitis, xerostomia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, sub-occlusion, dysgeusia, dysosmia, anorexia, and cachexia. Furthermore, we present a pragmatic example of a multidisciplinary workflow that incorporates customized recipes tailored to individual clinical scenarios, all while maintaining the hedonic value of the meals.

Portuguese consensus on the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting induced by cancer treatments

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) strongly affect the quality of life of patients with cancer. Inadequate antiemetic control leads to the decline of patients' quality of life, increases rescue interventions, and may even compromise adherence to cancer treatment. Although there are international recommendations for controlling CINV and RINV, these recommendations focus mainly on pharmacological management, with scarce information on additional measures that patients may adopt. Moreover, the prophylaxis and management of CINV/RINV are not always applied. Thus, we identified the need to systematize the strategies for preventing and managing CINV/RINV and the associated risk factors to implement and promote effective prophylactic antiemetic regimens therapy in patients with cancer. This review sought to create a set of practical recommendations for managing and controlling CINV/RINV, according to the current international recommendations for antiemetic therapy and the main risk factors. Conclusively, we intended to produce a patient-centered guidance document for health care professionals focused on the awareness, monitoring, and treatment of CINV/RINV.

The core symptom in multiple myeloma patients undergoing chemotherapy: a network analysis

BACKGROUND

During chemotherapy for multiple myeloma, symptoms include those related to the disease, as well as adverse effects of the treatment. Few studies have explored the relationships between these symptoms. Network analysis could identify the core symptom in the symptom network.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the core symptom in multiple myeloma patients undergoing chemotherapy.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study in which sequential sampling was used to recruit 177 participants from Hunan, China. Demographic and clinical characteristics were surveyed using a self-developed instrument. The symptoms of chemotherapy-treated multiple myeloma, including pain, fatigue, worry, nausea, and vomiting, were measured using a questionnaire with good reliability and validity. The mean ± SD, frequency, and percentages were used as descriptive statistics. Network analysis was used to estimate the correlation between symptoms.

RESULTS

The results showed that 70% of multiple myeloma patients using chemotherapy exhibited pain. In the network analysis, worrying was the dominant symptom, and the strongest relationship was between nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy-treated multiple myeloma patients' symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Worrying is the core symptom of multiple myeloma patients. Interventions could be most effective if there is a symptom management focus on worrying when providing care to chemotherapy-treated multiple myeloma patients. Nausea combined with vomiting could be better managed, which would decrease the cost of health care. Understanding the relationship between the symptoms of multiple myeloma patients undergoing chemotherapy is beneficial for precise symptom management.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurses and health care teams should be a priority to intervene in the worrying for chemotherapy-treated multiple myeloma patients to maximize the effectiveness of an intervention. Except, nausea and vomiting should be managed together in a clinical setting.

Olanzapine for the Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Review to Identify the Best Way to Administer the Drug

Common treatment methods for malignant tumors include surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, etc., among which chemotherapy plays an important role. However, chemotherapy brings corresponding side effects while killing tumor cells, and nausea and vomiting are the most common adverse reactions induced by chemotherapy. It not only affects the patient's appetite, resulting in malnutrition and electrolyte disturbances, but also reduces the patient's compliance with treatment, which further aggravates the disease. Thus, it is important to quickly prevent and cure nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy (CINV). In addition, with the continuous development of medicine, more and more antiemetic drugs have been developed. At present, the most common antiemetic agents for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are NK-1R antagonists, 5-HT3R antagonists, and dexamethasone. Surprisingly, olanzapine, often used as a psychotropic drug, has been found to be an effective antiemetic and is similar to other regimens on the safety of medicine. However, although there are numerous studies on the antiemetic effects of olanzapine, its comprehensive application remains unclear. Therefore, this review will elaborate the antiemetic effect of olanzapine in terms of the antiemetic mechanism and the safety, economic cost, dose, administration time, and drug delivery aspects.

Fosaprepitant versus aprepitant in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-simulated, positive-controlled phase III trial

Background

To establish the role of antiemetic therapy with neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists (RAs) in Chinese patients associated with cisplatin-base chemotherapy regimens, this study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-dose intravenous fosaprepitant-based triple antiemetic regimen to a 3-day orally aprepitant-based antiemetic triplet schedule for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

Methods

A randomized, double-blind, positive-control design was used to test the noninferiority of fosaprepitant towards aprepitant. Patients receiving cisplatin-base (≥50 mg/m²) chemotherapy were administrated palonosetron and dexamethasone with a single-dose fosaprepitant (150 mg on day 1) or a standard aprepitant regimen (125 mg on day 1, 80 mg on day 2 and day 3). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) during overall phase (OP). Secondary endpoints include CR during acute phase (AP) and delayed phase (DP), no vomiting and no significant nausea during OP, AP and DP. Accrual of 324 patients per treatment arm was planned to confirm noninferiority with expected CR of 75% and noninferiority margin of minus 10 percentage points.

Results

A total of 648 patients were randomly assigned, and 644 were evaluable for efficacy and safety. Antiemetic efficacy of CR during the OP with fosaprepitant and aprepitant was equivalent (71.96% versus 69.35%, P=0.4894). And a between-group difference of 2.61 percentage points was finally achieved (95% CI, -4.42 to 9.64) within predefined bounds for noninferiority (primary end point achieved). Both regimens were well tolerated and commonly reported adverse events (≥1%) were similar between these two group.

Conclusions

Single-dose intravenous fosaprepitant (150 mg) combined with palonosetron and dexamethasone was well tolerated and demonstrated noninferior control of CINV to aprepitant-based triple regimen in Chinese patients treating with cisplatin-base chemotherapy.

Toll-like receptor/interleukin-1 domain innate immune signalling pathway genetic variants are candidate predictors for severe gastrointestinal toxicity risk following 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Severe gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity is a common adverse effect following 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy treatment. The presence of severe GI toxicity leads to treatment revisions, sub-optimal therapy outcomes, and decreases to patients' quality of life. There are no adequate predictors for 5-FU-induced severe GI toxicity risk. The Toll-like receptor/interleukin-1 (TIR) domain innate immune signalling pathway is known to be a mediating pathway in the development of GI toxicity. Hence, genetic variability in this signalling pathway may alter the pathophysiology of GI toxicity and, therefore, be predictive of risk. However, little research has investigated the effects of TIR domain innate immune signalling pathway single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) on the risk and development of severe GI toxicity.

METHODS

This critical review surveyed the literature and reported on the in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo effects, as well as the genetic association, of selected TIR domain innate immune signalling pathway SNPs on disease susceptibility and gene functioning.

RESULTS

Of the TIR domain innate immune signalling pathway SNPs reviewed, evidence suggests interleukin-1 beta (IL1B) and tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF) SNPs have the greatest potential as predictors for severe GI toxicity risk. These results warrant further research into the effect of IL1B and TNF SNPs on the risk and development of severe GI toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

SNPs of the TIR domain innate immune signalling pathway have profound effects on disease susceptibility and gene functioning, making them candidate predictors for severe GI toxicity risk. The identification of a predictor for 5-FU-induced severe GI toxicity will allow the personalization of supportive care measures.

Risk factors for delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with low-emetic-risk chemotherapy: a prospective, observational, multicenter study

Purpose

Improvement in the control of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is needed. There is limited information on antiemetic prophylaxis for patients undergoing low-emetic-risk chemotherapy (LEC), and the optimal antiemetic treatment is not well understood. Therefore, we analyzed the risk factors for delayed CINV to aid in the development of individualized treatments.

Patients and methods

This prospective multicenter study was conducted in 13 hospitals and included patients with solid cancers undergoing LEC. A total of 222 patients were enrolled between September 2013 and November 2014. The participants completed a daily diary for 5 days after the commencement of the first cycle of LEC to describe the daily incidence of CINV (yes/no). Furthermore, the participants described the severity of nausea and the amount of food intake with the help of VAS.

Results

Two hundred and ten patients provided their data that were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression to examine the risk factors for delayed CINV. History of CINV, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥1, acute CINV, and single-day antiemetic prophylaxis were identified as independent risk factors for delayed CINV.

Conclusion

The current use of antiemetic prophylaxis according to the recommended guideline appears to effectively control delayed CINV in patients undergoing LEC. Therefore, patients with the abovementioned risk factors should be carefully observed, and their treatment should be adjusted according to their symptoms. The use of multiple-day dexamethasone may be beneficial for those patients who develop acute CINV, especially when it is accompanied by anorexia.

A prospective, observational, multicenter study on risk factors and prophylaxis for low emetic risk chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

PURPOSE

The incidence of and the risk factors for nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing low emetic risk chemotherapy (LEC) are unclear. The aim of the study was to provide information on these topics by performing a multicenter, observational, prospective study.

METHODS

The study consisted of patients who were administered first-time LEC that was consistent or inconsistent with current guidelines. Using the visual analog scale, patients recorded their daily food intake and the occurrence and severity of nausea over a 5-day treatment period.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting did not differ significantly between patients undergoing guideline-consistent (n = 89) or guideline-inconsistent (n = 121) prophylaxis (30.3 vs. 22.3%, respectively; P = 0.19). Logistic regression analysis identified a history of nausea and LEC other than taxanes as independent risk factors associated with nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing LEC. The mean daily visual analog scale scores for nausea severity and a decrease in food intake were <25 mm throughout the entire observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline-consistent prophylaxis appeared to control nausea and vomiting effectively in patients undergoing LEC. However, patients with a history of nausea and receiving LEC other than taxanes should be carefully observed and treatment should be adjusted according to their symptoms.

Differential clinical pharmacology of rolapitant in delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)

Rolapitant is a highly selective neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, orally administered for a single dose of 180 mg before chemotherapy with granisetron D1, dexamethasone 8 mg BID on day 2-4. It has a unique pharmacological characteristic of a long plasma half-life (between 163 and 183 hours); this long half-life makes a single use sufficient to cover the delayed emesis risk period. No major drug-drug interactions between rolapitant and dexamethasone or other cytochrome P450 inducers or inhibitors were observed. The clinical efficacy of rolapitant was studied in two phase III trials in highly emetogenic chemotherapy and in one clinical trial in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a complete response (defined as no emesis or use of rescue medication) in the delayed phase (>24-120 hours after chemotherapy). In comparison to granisetron (10 μg/kg intravenously) and dexamethasone (20 mg orally) on day 1, and dexamethasone (8 mg orally) twice daily on days 2-4 and placebo, rolapitant showed superior efficacy in the control of delayed and overall emesis. This review aims at revising the pharmacological characteristics of rolapitant, offering an updated review of the available clinical efficacy and safety data of rolapitant in different clinical settings, highlighting the place of rolapitant in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among currently available guidelines, and exploring the future directions of CINV management.

SEOM Clinical Guideline update for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (2016)

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is one of the most worrisome adverse effects of chemotherapy for cancer patients. It can cause severe discomfort and affect the quality of life. In recent years, the incorporation of new drugs has increased the efficacy of antiemetic treatments in the control of emesis associated with chemotherapy. This guideline, in which we give some treatment recommendations with level of evidence and grade of recommendation, provides an update of the previously published guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and represents our continued commitment to improving supportive care in cancer patients.