A prospective observational study of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in routine practice in a UK cancer centre

Objective The aim of the study was to assess levels of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in routine practice. Materials and methods The study was an observational prospective evaluation using patient self-reports. One hundred and two patients with cancer in a single cancer centre in UK receiving their first chemotherapy treatment participated in the study and were followed up over four cycles, providing a total of 272 assessments of nausea and vomiting. Data was collected with the use of the MASCC Antiemesis Tool (MAT), which is an eight-item short clinical scale assessing acute and delayed nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy. Results Results indicated that acute vomiting was experienced by 15.7% of the patients in cycle 1 and delayed vomiting by 14.7%, while acute nausea was present in 37.3% of the patients and delayed nausea in 47.1%, increasing over the subsequent cycles. Moderately emetogenic and highly emetogenic chemotherapy had the highest incidence of CINV, whereas patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy showed significant levels of delayed nausea. Acute symptoms were more easily controlled than delayed symptoms. Discussion The data suggest that, while vomiting is well controlled, nausea remains a significant problem in practice, and optimal management of CINV is yet to be achieved. Understanding more clearly the biological basis of nausea will assist in managing this complex symptom more effectively in practice.     

Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Taiwan: physicians’ and nurses’ estimation vs. patients’ reported outcomes

Background The major objective of the study was to determine the incidence and prevalence of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving chemotherapy and assess the accuracy with which medical providers perceive the incidence of CINV in their practice.Methods Specialists, residents and nurses (medical providers) from two cancer centers in Taiwan estimated the incidence of acute and delayed CINV. Chemotherapy-naïve patients from the same centers then completed a 5-day nausea and vomiting diary following highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC) to determine the actual incidence of acute and delayed CINV. Daily nausea ratings were recorded on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). No nausea was defined as a nausea VAS score <5 mm. Vomiting episodes were also recorded. Nausea and vomiting were defined as acute and delayed based on whether they occurred during the first 24 h after chemotherapy, or during days 2–5 after chemotherapy, respectively.Results In the two oncology centers, 37 medical providers (13 specialists, 4 residents, 20 nurses) and 107 patients were enrolled. The mean patient age was 49.2 years with 76% female and 74% having breast cancer. Of the 107 patients, 39% received HEC and 61% received MEC, and 77% received a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and 94% received dexamethasone. There were no significant differences between patients with acute CINV and delayed CINV in terms of demographics, chemotherapy treatment or antiemetic treatment. The proportion of patients without alcohol use was significantly higher among patients with delayed CINV than among those with non-delayed CINV. Good control of CINV during the acute period correlated with the control of delayed emesis. There were no significant differences between specialists, residents, and nurses estimations of the incidence rates of CINV. For HEC given to chemotherapy-naïve patients, the medical providers estimated acute CINV to be 44/41% and delayed CINV to be 61/53%, respectively. However, patient diaries revealed acute CINV to be 43/21% and delayed CINV to be 64/60%, respectively. For MEC given to chemotherapy-naïve patients, medical providers estimated acute CINV to be 39/36% and delayed CINV to be 44/39%, respectively. However, patient diaries revealed acute CINV to be 55/18% and delayed CINV to be 74/55%, respectively.Conclusions Medical providers significantly overestimated the incidence of acute vomiting by 20% and 18% in HEC and MEC patients, respectively. While they correctly estimated the rate of delayed vomiting in HEC patients, they underestimated it by 16% in MEC patients. With respect to nausea, medical providers correctly estimated rates of both acute and delayed nausea in HEC patients, but significantly underestimated rates of acute and delayed nausea by 16% and 30%, respectively, in MEC patients.     

醋酸甲地孕酮预防化疗引起的消化道反应的临床研究

目的：观察醋酸甲地孕酮（MA）在预防化疗引起的消化道反应中的作用。方法：收集2007年6月～2008年6月病理学和细胞学证实的消化道恶性肿瘤60例,采用自身前后交叉对照研究,随机分为AB和BA两组。AB组第一周期止吐方案用格拉司琼＋胃复安＋MA,第二周期止吐方案用格拉司琼＋胃复安;BA组第一周期止吐方案用格拉司琼＋胃复安,第二周期止吐方案MA＋格拉司琼＋胃复安。结果：化疗同时配合使用MA恶心、呕吐发生率下降（P〈0．05）;恶心、呕吐程度改善（P〈0．001）,并且可以预防化疗引起的急性期和延迟期恶心、呕吐反应（P〈0．05）。结论：化疗同时配合使用MA可以改善化疗患者的恶心呕吐反应。     

Phase II trial of encapsulated ginger as a treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Goals of work  Ginger has been used to treat numerous types of nausea and vomiting. Ginger has also been studied for its efficacy for acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, its efficacy for delayed CINV in a diverse oncology population is unknown. Materials and methods  We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 162 patients with cancer who were receiving chemotherapy and had experienced CINV during at least one previous round of chemotherapy. All participants were receiving a 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists and/or aprepitant. Participants were randomized to receive either 1.0 g ginger, 2.0 g ginger daily, or matching placebo for 3 days. The primary outcome was change in the prevalence of delayed CINV. Secondary outcomes included acute prevalence of CINV, acute and delayed severity of CINV, and assessment of blinding. Main results  There were no differences between groups in the prevalence of delayed nausea or vomiting, prevalence of acute CINV, or severity of delayed vomiting or acute nausea and vomiting. Participants who took both ginger and aprepitant had more severe acute nausea than participants who took only aprepitant. Participants were able to accurately guess which treatment they had received. Ginger appeared well tolerated, with no difference in all adverse events (AEs) and significantly less fatigue and miscellaneous AEs in the ginger group. Conclusions  Ginger provides no additional benefit for reduction of the prevalence or severity of acute or delayed CINV when given with 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists and/or aprepitant. This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00065221.     

The impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on health-related quality of life

Goal of work The objectives of this prospective observational study were to estimate the frequency of patients who reported an impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) on their daily life and to evaluate the determinants of such an impact. Materials and methods Adult cancer patients at seven Italian oncology centers who were receiving cisplatin-containing regimens reported incidence and intensity of CINV for eight consecutive days in a diary and completed a Functional Living Index for Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire. Main results Overall, 34% of patients reported vomiting and 62% reported nausea after chemotherapy. On days 1 to 5 after receiving chemotherapy, 67% of patients who had at least one emetic episode and 77% of those who suffered from at least mild nausea experienced an impact on their daily activities as measured on the FLIE questionnaire. More than 90% of all patients with both acute and delayed nausea or vomiting reported an impact on their daily life. Both acute and delayed vomiting contributed in similar measure to impact daily life; however, the importance of delayed nausea was greater than that of acute nausea. Conclusions Despite antiemetic prophylaxis, CINV is still prevalent and often impacts the daily life of patients in Italy, especially in the delayed phase. The duration more than the severity seems to be responsible for the impact of CINV on the patients’ daily lives.     

肿瘤化疗所致恶心呕吐现状调查

目的调查化疗所致恶心呕吐（chemotherapy—inducednauseaandvomiting,CINV）的患者心理预期和发生情况,并评估CINV对患者生活质量的影响,为提高临床医生对CINV的认识和重视提供依据。方法采用问卷调查的方式,调查华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院使用中度致吐风险化疗（MEC）或高度致吐风险化疗（HEC）的患者,并对其进行连续两周期相同化疗方案的随访。患者分别于化疗开始前、化疗第2天和化疗第6天,记录化疗期间急性、延迟性恶心呕吐发生情况、自主止吐用药和CINV对生活功能的影响,调查结果采用描述性分析和多元线性回归分析。结果本研究共调查344例患者,最终303例患者完成问卷调查。结果显示：单日化疗MEC组急性、延迟性和总的完全缓解率分别为86．1％、76．6％和71．5％,HEC组为84．1％、71．0％和66．7％。多日化疗患者分别为93．8％、64．9％和64．9％;第2周期化疗前患者关于恶心呕吐预期值和焦虑值与患者前一周期化疗延迟性恶心发生的严重程度密切相关;约30％的患者因CINV对生活功能造成负面影响。结论在行中度和高度致吐风险化疗的患者中,CINV治疗现状仍存在较大问题,尤其是在延迟期反应和恶心症状的控制方面。在临床实践中需进一步加强对CINV的关注,并提供更加有效的治疗措施。     

芳香疗法预防肿瘤患者化疗后恶心及呕吐的系统评价

目的评价芳香疗法对肿瘤患者化疗后恶心、呕吐的预防效果。方法检索数据库包括PubMed、WebofScience、Cochrane Library、Embase、CINAHL、知网、维普、万方和中国生物医学文献数据库,检索时限为从建库至2019年7月17日,收集芳香疗法预防肿瘤患者化疗后恶心、呕吐的随机对照试验,评价和提取信息后,采用RevMan5.3软件进行分析。结果共纳入10篇文献,共计1267例患者,按评估量表的种类分别进行Meta分析。在芳香疗法预防急性恶心的效果分析中,以视觉模拟评分量表(visual analogue scale,VAS)为结局指标的分析结果为[MD=-7.26,95%CI(-13.22,-1.31),P=0.02];以恶心、呕吐、干呕评分为结局指标的分析结果为[MD=-1.05,95%CI(-1.55,-0.55),P<0.0001];以急性恶心的发生率为结局指标的分析结果为[RR=0.69,95%CI(0.52,0.91),P=0.009]。芳香疗法预防急性干呕效果的分析结果为[MD=-0.59,95%CI(-0.97,-0.21),P=0.002],预防延迟性干呕效果的分析结果为[MD=-0.93,95%CI(-1.54,-0.31)=0.003]。结论芳香疗法对化疗后急性恶心、急性干呕及延迟性干呕的预防效果显著优于对照组,对其他时期恶心、呕吐的预防效果仍需要进一步验证。     

渐进式肌肉放松训练对乳腺癌高致吐方案化疗所致恶心呕吐的效果观察

目的 探讨渐进式肌肉放松训练对乳腺癌高致吐方案化疗所致恶心呕吐(CINV)的治疗效果。方法 收集我院2017年1月-2017年6月行表阿霉素联合环磷酰胺(EC)方案化疗的乳腺癌患者68例,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组各34例。对照组给予托烷司琼注射液、地塞米松治疗;观察组在此基础上进行渐进式肌肉放松训练,比较两组对预防CINV的临床疗效。结果 急性期两组恶心、呕吐发生率、恶心缓解率及呕吐频次比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);延迟期两组恶心发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),观察组呕吐发生率、呕吐频次明显低于对照组,恶心缓解率明显高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 渐进式肌肉放松训练能显著降低乳腺癌高致吐方案化疗延迟期呕吐发生率、呕吐频次和恶心程度,简便易行,可用于临床防治乳腺癌高致吐方案化疗所致CINV。     

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in clinical practice: impact on patients’ quality of life

Background

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cancer patients are common symptoms most feared by patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of CINV associated to moderate/highly emetogenous chemotherapy regimens on patients’ quality of life (QoL).

Patients and methods

Open, multicenter, prospective observational study was performed. Each patient filled out a patient diary for each cycle from the day before chemotherapy and for the next 5?days that included the number of emetic episodes, the intensity of nausea, and QoL evaluation (functional living index-emesis questionnaire).

Results

Data from 202 consecutive patients from nine university hospitals were collected, but only data from 160 were analyzed (79.2?%). Most of the participants (70?%) were women with a mean age of 50?years (SD 1.2?years). The most frequent cancer site was breast (44?%) followed by lung (16?%) and 76.3?% were receiving highly emetogenous chemotherapy. Despite the use of antiemetic prophylaxis, patients experienced significant nausea and vomiting during 31?% (3.2?% during acute, 15.0?% during delayed phase, and 13.2?% during both phases) and 45.1?% (5.1?% only during the acute phase, 23.5?% only during the delayed phase and 16.5?% during both phases) of the cycles, respectively, having 44.5?% (nausea) and 39.3?% (emesis) of the cycles an impact on patients’ QoL.

Conclusions

The results of the study confirm the detrimental effect of CINV on patients’ QoL despite the use of antiemetic prophylaxis (5HT₃ receptor antagonist, steroids, and dopamine receptor antagonists). It is mandatory to intensify the detection of CINV in order to improve the management of these important, albeit frequent, side effects of cancer treatments.     

5-HT3受体拮抗剂联合康复新液防治乳腺癌术后CINV的临床效果

目的探讨5-羟色胺3(5-HT3)受体拮抗剂联合康复新液防治乳腺癌术后化疗相关性呕吐(CINV)的临床效果。方法回顾性分析60例行乳腺癌改良根治术患者的临床资料,结合患者病理分期,均行术后辅助化疗,按照防治CINV方式的不同将患者分为对照组和研究组,各30例。对照组给予帕洛诺司琼治疗,研究组在对照组基础上给予康复新液治疗。比较两组的临床治疗效果。结果化疗后0~24 h、2~7 d,研究组的恶心、呕吐有效控制率均高于对照组(P<0.05)。研究组的满意度高于对照组(P<0.05)。结论采用5-HT3受体拮抗剂联合康复新液防治乳腺癌术后CINV的效果显著,能够有效缓解患者的恶心、呕吐情况。     

Validation and psychometric assessment of a short clinical scale to measure chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: the MASCC antiemesis tool

There is a lack of clinical tools to facilitate communication between clinicians and patients about chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) has developed such a tool, which is an eight-item scale for the assessment of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting, and is completed once per cycle of chemotherapy. The aim of the current study was to assess its psychometric properties, specifically reliability and validity, cultural transferability and equivalence, and congruence with proxy assessments, as well as to determine if accuracy of recall of CINV events using the MASCC Antiemesis Tool (MAT) differed over time from chemotherapy. A prospective study was carried out with adult cancer patients and their informal carers from two hospitals, one each in the United Kingdom (UK) and United States of America (U.S.). Patients completed the Rhodes Index for nausea, vomiting and retching (INVR) daily for the first five days after chemotherapy and were then asked to complete the MAT at one week, two weeks, or three weeks after chemotherapy. Carers completed an adapted MAT concurrently with patients. The sample consisted of 87 patients and 22 informal carers. The internal consistency reliability of the scale was high, with Cronbach alphas of 0.77 (patient sample) and 0.82 (carer sample). Responses were similar between the UK and U.S. samples in terms of nausea and vomiting, and both samples found the scale easy to use. Contrasted-groups validity (using age as a grouping variable) and concurrent validity (MAT compared with INVR) suggested that the scale is sensitive to detect the different dimensions of CINV and performed well against a daily assessment of nausea/vomiting (total score correlation r=0.86, P<0.001). Recall of events was high even three weeks after chemotherapy (correlations with INVR of 0.44-0.99, all P<0.01). Factor analysis clearly identified three factors, namely vomiting, acute nausea, and delayed nausea. Proxy assessments by carers were congruent with the patients' responses, especially in relation to vomiting. The MAT is a reliable, valid, clear, and easy-to-use clinical tool that could facilitate discussion between clinicians and patients about their nausea and vomiting experience, thereby potentially aiding treatment decisions. Regular assessment of nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy has the potential to significantly improve CINV management.     

Aprepitant (EMEND): the role of substance P in nausea and vomiting

Aprepitant (EMEND) is the first commercially available drug from a new class of agents, the Substance P/neurokinin NK-1 receptor antagonists. Aprepitant is indicated for prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy in adults. Its ability to antagonize the effects of Substance P has lead to greater understanding of the pathophysiology of nausea and vomiting. Its broad range of activity against a wide variety of central and peripheral emetogenic stimuli make it potentially useful in non-chemotherapy related nausea and vomiting.     

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting—incidence and impact on patient quality of life at community oncology settings

Goals of work The present study sought to determine the prevalence of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) across ten community oncology settings. The effect of CINV on quality of life (QOL) was also evaluated. Materials and methods Cancer patients who were scheduled for their first cycle of a new chemotherapy regimen were recruited from ten community oncology clinics. Study participants recorded occurrence of CINV by completing a daily diary each day for the first 8 days after treatment during each cycle and the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) before chemotherapy, at the end of day 1 and day 6 after chemotherapy. Mixed model regression analysis was used to explore the association between occurrence of CINV at cycle 1 and subsequent cycles and its impact on patient QOL. Main results One hundred and fifty-one patients provided information for at least one cycle. During cycle 1, only 33% had neither acute nor delayed CINV. Of the 36% patients who developed acute CINV, 8% developed acute CINV only. Of the 59% who developed delayed CINV, 53% reported delayed only and 47% reported acute and delayed CINV. A similar pattern was seen at cycles 2 and 3. Experience of CINV at cycle 1 was associated with the development of CINV at cycles 2 and 3. Occurrence of CINV significantly interfered with patient QOL as assessed by the FLIE. Conclusions CINV remained a substantial problem for patients receiving chemotherapy in this community-based sample, especially delayed CINV. CINV significantly interfered with patient QOL and daily functioning. Work presented at the 39th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (poster discussion)—Chicago, IL, May 31–June 3, 2003 Work performed at California Cancer Care, CA Henry Hu and Eileen E. Ming were employed by Merck & Co., Inc. during this study. L. Cohen and Carl A. de Moor were consultants with Merck & Co., Inc. during this study.     

Palonosetron (Aloxi®) and dexamethasone for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting in patients receiving multiple-day chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of palonosetron combined with dexamethasone in prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving multiple-day chemotherapy and the efficacy of a second dose of palonosetron in treating breakthrough emesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six patients treated with multiple-day chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies received palonosetron as prophylaxis for CINV on the first day of chemotherapy and dexamethasone throughout the entire period of chemotherapy. If breakthrough emesis occurred, a second dose of palonosetron was administered after 72 h following the first administration. The results were retrospectively compared to group of patients with similar clinical characteristics undergoing similar multiple-day chemotherapy. This group had received single-dose ondansetron as CINV prophylaxis on the first day of chemotherapy plus dexamethasone throughout the entire period of chemotherapy and metoclopramide for breakthrough emesis. RESULTS: One hundred eighty and 173 chemotherapy cycles were administered in the palonosetron and ondansetron groups, respectively. Nausea and vomiting were absent in 80% of patients of the palonosetron group and 60% of the control group (p < 0.05). In the palonosetron group, 67% of patients who experienced CINV were successfully rescued by a second dose of palonosetron, while in the ondansetron group, only 22% showed a no CINV after metoclopramide treatment (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The present results appear to be encouraging in terms of complete prophylaxis of CINV and treatment of breakthrough emesis in the setting of multiple-day chemotherapy.     

Evaluation of Risk Factors Predicting Chemotherapy-Related Nausea and Vomiting: Results From a European Prospective Observational Study

ContextDemographic, personal, clinical, and behavioral factors predicting chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) have been assessed in the past, but inconsistencies exist in the literature, studies have methodological shortcomings, and many risk factors have been examined in cross-sectional studies and univariate analyses.ObjectivesTo evaluate the predictive power of personal and treatment-related characteristics in the development of CINV, using a large and prospectively evaluated sample of a heterogeneous group of cancer patients receiving routine chemotherapy.MethodsThis was a multicountry, multisite prospective study over three cycles of chemotherapy. Adult patients from eight European countries about to receive highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy were recruited. Clinicians completed a case report form at or before the initial chemotherapy treatment, recording patient demographic and baseline clinical characteristics. Participants completed a daily patient diary for six days per chemotherapy cycle describing their CINV experience. Baseline patient data also included a history of nausea/vomiting (yes/no), patient expectation of nausea (0–100 mm visual analogue scale [VAS]), prechemotherapy anxiety (0–100 mm VAS), and prechemotherapy nausea (0–100 mm VAS) measured during the 24-hour period before chemotherapy initiation.ResultsThere were 991 evaluable patients with complete Cycle 1 data, 888 for Cycle 2 data, and 769 for Cycle 3 data. A complex picture of predictor variables was shown, with different contribution of variables to the acute, delayed, and overall phases of CINV. Key predictor variables included the use of antiemetics inconsistent with international guidelines, younger age, prechemotherapy nausea, and no CINV complete response in an earlier cycle (all at P < 0.05). Anxiety, history of nausea/vomiting, and expectations of nausea were important predictors for some phases and cycles but not consistently across the CINV pathway.ConclusionThe results of this study provide clarity for the relative contribution of a set of characteristics in the development of CINV. Following evidence-based clinical antiemetic guidelines is of paramount importance, alongside treating patients with increased risk for CINV more aggressively, which both could lead to more optimal CINV management. These data can assist clinicians in making decisions about the antiemetic management of their patients.     

The cost of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Italy

Goals of work The aim of this paper is to analyze the costs of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in Italy. Materials and methods In this prospective observational study at seven public oncology centers, incidence and intensity of CINV daily for 8 days after chemotherapy in consecutive patients receiving cisplatin-containing chemotherapy were recorded. All costs related to CINV (direct medical, direct nonmedical, and indirect) were recorded (in 2003 euros). Main results A total of 172 patients were enrolled; cost data were available for 168 patients. Thirty-seven percent of patients experienced acute CINV, and 57% experienced delayed CINV; 39% achieved total control, defined as no nausea, vomiting, or rescue therapy. Mean per-patient costs of acute and delayed CINV were €30.03 from the hospital perspective, €4.9 from the patient perspective, and €26.85 from the National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Costs of CINV were highly variable among oncology centers, largely because of differences in procedures for preventing delayed CINV. These costs were four times higher when antiemetic drugs were prescribed and paid for by the NHS than when antiemetic prophylaxis was provided directly from hospital pharmacies. Moreover, in the delayed phase, the NHS incurred a 94% increase in costs for patients without total control. Overall costs for patients who did not experience total control of CINV were €35.57 higher than for those who did (85% increase). Conclusions Costs of CINV for the Italian NHS could be reduced if hospitals furnished antiemetic prophylaxis directly to patients. Better control of both acute and delayed CINV would improve patient well-being as well as reduce the budgetary impact of CINV in Italy.     

Efficacy and safety of palonosetron as salvage treatment in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC)

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) palonosetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer who had incomplete control of CINV during their previous cycle of low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC).

Methods

Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed cancer, ≥18 years of age, with a Karnofsky Performance Scale score of ≥50 % who had received LEC that induced vomiting and/or at least moderate nausea during their previous treatment cycle received palonosetron 0.25 mg IV 30 min before chemotherapy. Outcomes were recorded in patient diaries over 120 h and at an end-of-study visit on days 6, 7, or 8 after LEC administration. The primary efficacy variable was the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication at 0–24 h (acute post-chemotherapy phase), 24–120 h (delayed phase), and 0–120 h (overall).

Results

Complete responses among the intent-to-treat study population (n?=?34) were recorded for 88.2 % of patients in the acute phase, 67.6 % in the delayed phase, and 67.6 % overall. No emetic episodes occurred in 91.2 and 79.4 % of patients during the acute and delayed phases, respectively, and no nausea in 73.5 and 52.9 %, respectively. Palonosetron was well tolerated; only two patients experienced treatment-related adverse events.

Conclusions

Among the patients with cancer who had a history of CINV with LEC, palonosetron was effective in preventing CINV in both the acute and delayed post-chemotherapy phases, and was well tolerated. Randomized comparative studies in larger populations of patients receiving LEC are needed to confirm these findings.     

Clinical Updates in Nausea and Vomiting

ObjectiveTo review recent updated antiemetic guidelines from national cancer organizations and its impact on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in the prevention and delayed phase of therapy. This article will also describe assessment and nursing strategies for individualized care and timely side effect management.Data SourcesData sources include peer-reviewed articles sourced in electronic databases.ConclusionCINV is a persistent problem for a large percentage of patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment despite advances in antiemetic therapy and increased use of targeted therapies. CINV management should be based on patient-focused assessment and adherence to national antiemetic guidelines. Ongoing assessment and follow-up are critical to ensure optimum management of side effects to optimized quality of life.Implications for Nursing PracticeAwareness of national antiemetic guidelines is important in caring for patients undergoing chemotherapy. CINV can have a significant impact on patients, causing physical effects, treatment delays, and diminished quality of life. Oncology nurses play a key role in assessment of patient-related risk factors, education of patients and caregivers regarding pain medications, side effects, and oral adherence and continued follow-up for early recognition and intervention for uncontrolled CINV.     

Palonosetron: a unique 5-HT3 receptor antagonist indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Despite the advance in supportive care that occurred with the introduction of selective serotonin subtype 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with first-generation agents (ondansetron, dolasetron, and granisetron) is less than ideal. Palonosetron is a unique 5-HT3 receptor antagonist whose distinctive pharmacologic characteristics (ie, high 5-HT3 receptor binding affinity, prolonged half-life) result in superior clinical benefit. Superiority of palonosetron over ondansetron and dolasetron in the prevention of both acute and delayed CINV has been observed in each phase III trial conducted. Of note, such evidence of superiority has never been seen in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) registration trials of other approved agents in this class. Recently approved by the FDA, palonosetron 0.25 mg intravenously is indicated for the prevention of acute nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of moderately and highly emetogenic cancer chemotherapy. Unlike other 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, palonosetron is also indicated for prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of moderately emetogenic cancer chemotherapy. Palonosetron exhibits an excellent tolerability profile, with frequency, severity, and duration of adverse reactions similar to that of comparator agents. Unlike older agents that are considered therapeutically interchangeable at equipotent doses, palonosetron should be considered a clinically distinct and superior treatment for the prevention of CINV.     

Update on the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Chemotherapy is associated with a variety of side effects, and many of these can be dose-limiting. One of the most dreaded side effects for patients receiving chemotherapy is nausea and vomiting, however. Although in the last 2 decades there have been several advances in the development of new therapies for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), recent pharmacologic advances have significantly improved control of this feared side effect. Antiemetic guidelines help clinicians manage CINV and are updated frequently. Ongoing studies further define appropriate management of patients with CINV; of particular interest is delayed nausea and vomiting. With the addition of the long-acting serotonin antagonist, palonosetron, and the unique neurokinin-1 antagonist, aprepitant, control of CINV has improved considerably for those patients receiving chemotherapy. This article discusses CINV and recent pharmacologic advances in controlling this side effect. Guidelines for the management of CINV are reviewed.