Patterns of antiemetic prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in China

Retrospective analysis of real-world prescribing data for managing cisplatin-based chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in China

BACKGROUND

The current utilization of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) and the impact of updated guidelines on prescription patterns of antiemetic drugs among Chinese patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) remain undetermined. This study aims to analyze the present situation of Chinese cancer patients using antiemetic drugs and assess the appropriateness of antiemetic regimens.

METHODS

Prescription data were collected between January 2015 and December 2020 from cancer patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy at 76 hospitals in six major cities in China. Trends in the use of antiemetic drugs, prescribing patterns and adherence to antiemetic guidelines were assessed.

RESULTS

Among the 108,611 patients included in this study, 6 classes and 17 antiemetic drugs were identified as monotherapy or combination therapy in 93,872 patients (86.4%), whereas 14,739 patients (13.6%) were administered no antiemetic treatment. 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) and glucocorticoids were the two most frequently used classes of antiemetics, followed by metoclopramide. NK1RAs were underused across the six cities, only 9332 (8.6%) and 1655 (1.5%) cisplatin-based treatments were prescribed aprepitant and fosaprepitant, respectively. Prescriptions of olanzapine and lorazepam were very low throughout the study period. In prescribing patterns of antiemetic drugs, dual combination regimens were the most common (40.0%), followed by triple combination therapy and monotherapy (25.8% and 15.1%, respectively). Overall, the adherence to antiemetic guidelines for patients undergoing cisplatin-based regimens was only 8.1% due to inadequate prescription of antiemetic drugs. Finally, our study also revealed that 5-HT3RAs and glucocorticoids were overprescribed in 8.8% and 1.6% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study reveals suboptimal utilization of recommended antiemetic drugs for managing cisplatin-based HEC-induced nausea and vomiting in China. Improving the management of CINV is crucial, and these findings provide valuable insights into optimizing antiemetic drug practices.

Potentially inappropriate medications among older patients with Parkinson's disease: a cross-sectional analysis of a national health insurance database in China

BACKGROUND

With the rapid aging trend of China's population, the issue of drug rational use in older adults has become more and more prominent. Parkinson's disease (PD) is the one of the most common age-related neurodegenerative disorders. Pharmaceutical treatment plays a cardinal role in alleviating motor and non-motor symptoms to improve the quality of life of patients with PD. Patients with PD have complex medical needs yet little is known about the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) among them in China. We quantify the prevalence of PIM use and identify its predictors among older persons with PD in China.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using a national representative database of all medical insurance beneficiaries across China, extracting records of ambulatory visits of older adults with PD between 2015 and 2017. Beneficiaries aged 65 and above were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence of patients exposed to overall PIMs and PIMs related to motor and cognitive impairment was calculated based on Beers Criteria 2015 version. Potential predictors of PIM concerning patients' characteristics were estimated using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 14,452 older adults with PD were included. In total, 8,356 (57.8%) patients received at least one PIM; 2,464 (17.1%) patients received at least one motor-impairing PIM and 6,201 (42.9%) patients received at least one cognition-impairing PIM. The prevalence of overall PIM use was higher in patients of older age group (54.7% [65-74] vs. 59.5% [75-84; OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14-1.31] vs.65.5% [≥ 85; OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.38-1.80) and females (61.4% [female] vs. 55.0% [males; OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.72-0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing PIMs for older adults with PD was common in China, especially for females and older age groups, yet younger patients were more inclined to be prescribed with motor or cognition-impaired PIMs. Our findings represent a clear target awaiting multidimensional efforts to promote the rational prescribing of medications for this vulnerable population.

Efficacy of press needle treatment in reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea, vomiting, and retching gastrointestinal cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and retching often pose challenges in managing patients with gastrointestinal cancer. This randomized controlled trial sought to evaluate the effectiveness of press needle therapy in mitigating CINV and retching following chemotherapy.

Methods

Two hundred patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy were randomly assigned to either the press needle group or the control group. The control group received 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) antagonists and dexamethasone 30 min before chemotherapy, followed by dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 after chemotherapy. In contrast, the press needle group received press needle treatment 30 min prior to chemotherapy. The primary outcome was the Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching (INVR), assessed at seven time points: before chemotherapy and at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 h post-chemotherapy.

Results

All patients completed their respective treatments, and no significant adverse effects related to press needle treatment (such as skin allergies, acupoint infections, headaches, or dizziness) were reported. A two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant differences in INVR scores between the two groups (P < 0.05). Further analysis with a t-test indicated that INVR scores in the press needle treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group at 12, 24, and 36 hours after chemotherapy (P < 0.05), with no significant difference observed thereafter.

Conclusions

Press needle treatment effectively alleviated nausea, vomiting, and retching in patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy. It represents a safe, efficient, and convenient complement to preventive treatment with 5-HT3 antagonists.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR1900024554).

Effectiveness of antiemetic in reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adult patients; An oncology center experience

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are two serious adverse effect of cancer chemotherapy. The objectives of this study are to assess patient satisfaction with antiemetics prescribed, incidence of nausea and vomiting in cancer patients, and the effectiveness of antiemetic regimens in reducing CINV.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational cross-sectional patient survey study, conducted between January and July 2021 in the oncology center at King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A suitable, data entry form was designed to collect data including patient demographics, cancer type, antiemetics prescribed, chemotherapy regimen, and incidence of CINV.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 283 cancer patients with a mean age of 47.7 (±14.6) years. Colorectal and breast cancer (n = 67; 23.6%, for each) were the two most common diagnoses. Among the patients who received chemotherapy, most patients (n = 144; 50.8%) received chemotherapy that was classified as highly emetogenic, and 139 (49%) received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Antiemetics were given to control CINV before chemotherapy administration (as prophylaxis) were either combination therapy (170 patients (60.0%) received four classes of antiemetics, 72 (25.4%) received three classes; and 31 (10.9%) received two classes) or monotherapy (six patients (2.1%) received one drug). Four patients (1.4%) did not receive any antiemetic medication. Antiemetics given to control CINV after chemotherapy administration (for delayed CINV) were also either in combination (151 patients (53.3%) received three classes of antiemetics and 94 (33.2%) received two classes) or as monotherapy, where 27 patients (9.5%) received one medication. Eleven patients (3.8%) did not receive any antiemetic. The incidence rates for acute and delayed nausea after chemotherapy treatment were 32.1% and 30.7%, respectively; and those for acute and delayed vomiting were 13.4% and 10.2%, respectively. Acute nausea was much more frequent than vomiting.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of CINV was relatively high, and patients who received chemotherapy continued to experience nausea and vomiting despite receiving antiemetic treatment. This demonstrates that antiemetic regimens used are not effective in preventing CINV.

A retrospective study on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in highly/moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: incidence and prescribing practice

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting (CINV) is a common and significant problem in oncology patients and rated as one of cancer chemotherapy's most distressing side effects. The objectives of this study are to describe the incidence of CINV in highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy-treated patients and the prescribing pattern of CINV prophylaxis.

METHODS

This retrospective, cross-sectional single-center study randomly collected data on demographics, CINV episodes, and prescribing patterns for adult oncology patients receiving intravenous highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC/MEC) between January and December 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 419 randomly selected records of HEC/MEC recipients with 2388 total chemotherapy cycles were included. The mean age was 53.6 ± 12.6 years old. The majority was female (66%), Malay (54.4%), diagnosed with cancer stage IV (47.7%), and with no comorbidities (47%). All patients were prescribed with IV granisetron and dexamethasone before chemotherapy for acute prevention, whereas dexamethasone and metoclopramide were prescribed for delayed prevention. Aprepitant was not routinely prescribed for the prevention of CINV. CINV incidence was 57% in the studied population and 20% in the total cycle. This study found a significant association between CINV incidence with performance status and cisplatin-based chemotherapy (OR = 3.071, CI = 1.515-6.223, p = 0.002; OR = 4.587, CI = 1.739-12.099, p = 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSION

CINV incidence was rather high per patient but relatively low per cycle. Most patients were prescribed with dual regimen antiemetic prophylaxis.

IMPACT

This study provides evidence that there was suboptimal use of recommended agents for CINV, and there is a clear need for further improvements in CINV management.

Psychotropic medication utilisation in adult cancer patients in China: A cross-sectional study based on national health insurance database

Background

Psychotropic medications are useful to treat psychiatric disorders which are frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated in cancer patients. Evidence on utilisation of psychotropic medications in cancer patients was absent in China. This study aimed to analyse the prevalence and the potential predictors of psychotropic medication use in adult cancer patients in China.

Methods

We analysed cross-sectional data from the China Health Insurance Association database in 2015-2017, which contained health care utilisation information for a national representative sample of basic medical insurance beneficiaries. Cancer patients aged above 18 were identified by International Classification of Disease 10th revision code C00-C97. Psychotropic medications were defined following the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes: antipsychotics (N05A), anxiolytics (N05B), hypnotics and sedatives (N05C), and antidepressants (N06A, N06CA). We calculated the prevalence of psychotropic medication use in cancer patients, and applied multivariable logistic regression to identify its potential predictors.

Findings

A total of 260,364 adults with cancer were identified in the database, of which 48,111 (18•5%) were prescribed at least one psychotropic medication comprising antipsychotics (3763, 1•4%), anxiolytics (15,902, 6•1%), hypnotics and sedatives (37,040, 14•2%), and antidepressants (2379, 0•9%). Patients with solid tumours had higher prevalence of psychotropic medication use than patients with lymphoid and hematopoietic malignancies (e.g. female genital organs, adjusted odds ratio (OR)=2•25, 95%CI=2•09-2•44). The prevalence of psychotropic medication use in cancer patients in the Eastern region was significantly higher than those of cancer patients in the Western regions (OR=2•33, 95%CI=2•27-2•40). Compared with the Urban Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance beneficiaries, cancer patients covered by the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance were more likely to use psychotropic medications (OR=1•18, 95%CI=1•15-1•20). Midazolam was the most frequently used psychotropic (21,728, 45•2%), and flupentixol-melitracen was the most commonly used antidepressant (1176, 2•4%) among all psychotropic medication users in the sample.

Interpretation

The prevalence of psychotropic medication use in Chinese adult cancer patients was inequitable. Further attention will be needed to be paid to the mental health of cancer patients in China.

Funding

No funding.

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) with GI Cancer Chemotherapy: Do We Need CINV Risk Score Over and Above Antiemetic Guidelines in Prescribing Antiemetic Regime?

Background  Various predictive models have been developed which incorporates patient risk factors into the selection of optimal antiemetic therapy, one of which is chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) risk scoring system developed by Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). Patients and Methods  Consecutive patients with gastrointestinal malignancy who had not received previous chemotherapy were eligible for enrollment in the study if they were scheduled to receive at least one cycle of chemotherapy. The CINV risk assessment tool was used to collect the study data and to assess CINV risk score. Results  Ninety-eight patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were included in this study, out of which 57% were males, median age was 48 years (range: 28-77). Colorectal cancer (32.7%) was the most common diagnosis followed by gastric cancer (27.6%). Gemcitabine/cisplatin and CAPOX regimen were the most common regimen being administered in 19.4% each. As per MASCC guidelines, 19.4% patients received highly emetogenic chemotherapy, 69.4% moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, while 11.2% received regimen with low emetogenicity. CINV risk module characterized 52% patients to have high risk for CINV, while 48% to have low risk of CINV, thus, 52% had the discrepancy in risk assigned by two methods, and this was statistically significant ( p = 0.025). In subgroup analysis, although patient cohort with acute nausea had no statistically significant discrepancy ( p = 0.123), but statistically significant discrepancy was found in patient cohort with delayed nausea ( p = 0.001), acute ( p = 0.038), and delayed ( p < 0.001) vomiting. Conclusion  A significant percentage of patients who receive chemotherapy continue to experience nausea and vomiting despite receiving antiemetic treatment as per standard guidelines. The study generates a hypothesis for future large randomized studies looking at change in antiemetic prophylaxis based on CINV risk tool, leading to improvement in complete response rates of acute and delayed CINV.

Health Care Utilization and Costs of Patients With Prostate Cancer in China Based on National Health Insurance Database From 2015 to 2017

BACKGROUND

In terms of medical costs, prostate cancer is on the increase as one of the most costly cancers, posing a tremendous economic burden, but evidence on the health care utilization and medical expenditure of prostate cancer has been absent in China.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze health care utilization and direct medical costs of patients with prostate cancer in China.

METHODS

Health care service data with a national representative sample of basic medical insurance beneficiaries between 2015 and 2017 were obtained from the China Health Insurance Association database. We conducted descriptive and statistical analyses of health care utilization, annual direct medical costs, and composition based on cancer-related medical records. Health care utilization was measured by the number of hospital visits and the length of stay.

RESULTS

A total of 3,936 patients with prostate cancer and 24,686 cancer-related visits between 2015 and 2017 were identified in the database. The number of annual outpatient and inpatient visits per patient differed significantly from 2015 to 2017. There was no obvious change in length of stay and annual direct medical costs from 2015 to 2017. The number of annual visits per patient (outpatient: 3.0 vs. 4.0, P < 0.01; inpatient: 1.5 vs. 2.0, P < 0.001) and the annual medical direct costs per patient (US$2,300.1 vs. US$3,543.3, P < 0.001) of patients covered by the Urban Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance (URRBMI) were both lower than those of patients covered by the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI), and the median out-of-pocket expense of URRBMI was higher than that of UEBMI (US$926.6 vs. US$594.0, P < 0.001). The annual direct medical costs of patients with prostate cancer in Western regions were significantly lower than those of patients in Eastern and Central regions (East: US$4011.9; Central: US$3458.6; West: US$2115.5) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was an imbalanced distribution of health care utilization among regions in China. The direct medical costs of Chinese patients with prostate cancer remained stable, but the gap in health care utilization and medical costs between two different insurance schemes and among regions still needed to be further addressed.

Medication overuse in oncology: current trends and future implications for patients and society

The high cost of cancer care worldwide is largely attributable to rising drugs prices. Despite their high costs and potential toxic effects, anticancer treatments could be subject to overuse, which is defined as the provision of medical services that are more likely to harm than to benefit a patient. We found 30 studies documenting medication overuse in cancer, which included 16 examples of supportive medication overuse and 17 examples of antineoplastic medication overuse in oncology. Few specific agents have been assessed, and no studies investigated overuse of the most toxic or expensive medications currently used in cancer treatment. Although financial, psychological, or physical harms of medication overuse in cancer could be substantial, there is little published evidence addressing these harms, so their magnitude is unclear. Further research is needed to better quantify medication overuse, understand its implications, and help protect patients and the health-care system from overuse.

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 Study on Utilization and Evaluation of Antiemetics in Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting

Purpose

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are the major adverse effects of cancer chemotherapy. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the utilization of antiemetics in CINV and to assess the emetogenicity of chemotherapy and to investigate the incidence of acute and delayed CINV.

Methods

A prospective observational study was carried out in patients undergoing chemotherapy. A suitable data collection form was designed to collect data regarding patient's demographics, cancer type, chemotherapy regimen, antiemetic prescribed, and incidence of CINV according to the standard methods utilizing morrow assessment of nausea and emesis form.

Results

Among 200 patients enrolled in the study, with age range of 18-83 (52 ± 11.65; mean ± standard deviation) of both sexes (44% of male and 56% of female), 38.5% of patients received highly emetogenic chemotherapy and 46.5% received moderate emetogenic chemotherapy. Among the patients, 88% received 5HT3-RA in combination with corticosteroid (99%) and NK1-RA (40.5%). Despite the administration of antiemetic, the incidence of acute and delayed nausea after chemotherapy treatment was reported by 54% and 15.5%, respectively. The comparable figures for acute and delayed vomiting were 36.5% and 14.5%.

Conclusion

The incidence of CINV among the patients was relatively high and it indicates that more attention is needed for the treatment of both acute and delayed CINV. It also gives an idea for implementation of more efficient antiemesis guideline in the clinical practice.