Antiemetic therapy in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy

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.

Effect on symptom control of structured information given to patients receiving chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The performance of a planned education model in patients receiving chemotherapy can alleviate the side effects of chemotherapy and thus can increase the quality of the patients' lives. In accordance with this view, this study was conducted with the purpose of examining the effect of planned education given to patients receiving chemotherapy on their symptom control.

METHODS

The study was quasi-experimental. A sample of 120 patients participated, of which 60 were in the experimental group (EG) and 60 were in the control group (CG). A patient data form and the chemotherapy symptom assessment scale (C-SAS) were used in order to collect the data. Median, Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant decreases in the frequencies of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting, constipation, pain, infectious signs, problems of mouth and throat, problems of skin and nails, appetite changes, weight loss or weight gain, feeling distressed/anxious, feeling pessimistic and unhappy, unusual fatigue, difficulty sleeping. Also, there were statistically significant decreases in the severity of eleven symptoms and on the discomfort levels of nine symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In the study, the planned education provided by the health-care providers had a positive effect on the symptom control of patients receiving chemotherapy.

Tele-practice guidelines for the symptom management of children undergoing cancer treatment

The provision of tele-practice symptom management is often without the provision of evidence-based guidelines. Under the auspices of the Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, a nursing task force was established to appraise the evidence and develop guidelines. Promising new efforts to enhance symptom management through tele-practice are emerging. Seven guidelines and one documentation tool were created from evidence compiled from case reports, clinical examples, and nonexperimental studies. The symptom management guidelines contribute to the paucity of literature and may serve as a useful resource for health professionals providing telephone advice and conducting tele-practice symptom management assessments.

A pilot study of a relaxation technique for management of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy

This study was designed to determine the effect of a progressive muscle relaxation intervention on nausea and vomiting associated with anticancer chemotherapy. Subjects were 30 hematology patients who were hospitalized and received chemotherapy treatment at a large hospital in the interior of São Paulo, Brazil. The results indicated that progressive muscle relaxation lead to statistically significant changes in physiological and muscle conditions and in nausea and vomiting levels. Therefore, this relaxation technique may be an effective nursing intervention method to allay or alleviate nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy. For future studies, we suggest using a control group, a homogeneous sample in terms of antiemetic and chemotherapy type and dosage, and the longitudinal following of subjects during chemotherapy.

The Pathophysiology of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a major debilitating side effect of oncology treatment despite recent advances in pharmaceutical management. Nurses who provide care to patients experiencing nausea and vomiting are often only marginally aware of the pathophysiological processes involved in the treatment. A better understanding of the science behind current interventions to reduce nausea and vomiting may help nurses use those interventions more effectively. This article reviews current knowledge about the pathophysiology of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. By understanding the pathophysiology behind this patient experience, gastroenterology nurses can develop a better understanding of the common symptoms of nausea and vomiting in general. When a nurse understands the complexity of factors causing nausea and vomiting, he or she will be better able to provide appropriate interventions to reduce these symptoms.

Integrating aprepitant and palonosetron into clinical practice: a role for the new antiemetics

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are among the most feared side effects of cancer treatment. With increasingly more complex chemotherapy treatments, CINV plays an important role in determining patients' quality of life, as well as when to halt potentially lifesaving therapy. Although significant progress has been made in the treatment of CINV, patients undergoing chemotherapy continue to report that this side effect is persistent and distressing. In 2003, two new agents were added to the armamentarium of antiemetic therapy. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved palonosetron, a longer-acting serotonin antagonist, and aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 antagonist and the first in a new class of antiemetics, for the treatment of CINV. Although the indications for both agents are similar, they have distinct differences. Decisions regarding placement of these agents into existing antiemetic protocols can be based on national guidelines, review of the literature, and clinical experience. This article will review current antiemetic therapy with an emphasis on the new additions to the treatment of CINV. Aprepitant and palonosetron represent significant changes in the treatment of CINV. Oncology nurses need to know current approaches to maximize effective antiemetic therapy.

Aprepitant: a review of its use in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Aprepitant (Emend) is the first commercially available drug from a new class of agents, the neurokinin NK(1) receptor antagonists. Oral aprepitant, in combination with other agents, is indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy in adults. In three randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials comparing aprepitant (125 mg day 1, 80mg once daily on days 2 and 3 or 2-5) plus standard therapy (intravenous ondansetron and oral dexamethasone) with standard therapy plus placebo, overall complete responses (primary endpoint, defined as no emesis and no rescue therapy) were seen in significantly more patients in the aprepitant arms (63-73% versus 43-52%, p < 0.01 for all comparisons). Complete responses and complete protection during the acute and delayed phase, and overall complete protection were also observed in significantly more patients in the aprepitant arms. The difference between treatment groups was more marked in the overall and delayed phases than in the acute phase. The antiemetic efficacy of aprepitant plus standard therapy in the prevention of CINV was maintained for up to six cycles of chemotherapy. Where assessed, more patients in the aprepitant plus standard therapy arms than the standard therapy plus placebo arms reported no impact of CINV on daily life, as assessed by the Functional Living Index-Emesis. Aprepitant is generally well tolerated. The most common adverse events in randomised trials were asthenia or fatigue. Other adverse events experienced by aprepitant recipients include anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea, nausea (after day 5 of the study) and hiccups. In addition to being a substrate for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4, aprepitant is also a moderate inhibitor and inducer of this isoenzyme as well as an inducer of CYP2C9. Thus, aprepitant has the potential to interact with other agents metabolised by hepatic CYP isoenzymes. In one trial, there was a higher incidence of serious infection or febrile neutropenia in the aprepitant plus standard therapy arm than the standard therapy plus placebo arm; this was attributed to a pharmacokinetic interaction between aprepitant and dexamethasone. In subsequent trials, a modified dexamethasone regimen was used. In conclusion, when added to standard therapy (a serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist and a corticosteroid), aprepitant is effective and generally well tolerated in the prevention of CINV associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy in adults. Despite marked advances in the prevention of CINV, standard therapy does not protect all patients. The addition of aprepitant to standard therapy provides an advance in the prevention of both acute and delayed CINV in adults with cancer.