Search

Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) is an oral anticancer drug with adequate efficacy in unresectable colorectal cancer, but frequently also induces chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). To investigate the occurrence of CINV and antiemetic therapy in patients with colorectal cancer treated with TAS-102 (JASCC-CINV 2001)., Methods: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study in patients with colorectal cancer who received TAS-102 without dose reduction for the first time. Primary endpoint was the incidence of vomiting during the overall period. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of nausea, significant nausea, anorexia, other adverse events (constipation, diarrhea, insomnia, fatigue, dysgeusia) and patient satisfaction. Patient diaries were used for primary and secondary endpoints. All adverse events were subjectively assessed using PRO-CTCAE ver 1.0. and CTCAE ver 5.0., Results: Data from 100 of the 119 enrolled patients were analyzed. The incidence of vomiting, nausea, and significant nausea was 13%, 67%, and 36%, respectively. The incidence of vomiting in patients with and without prophylactic antiemetic therapy were 20.8% and 10.5%, respectively. Prophylactic antiemetics were given to 24% of patients, of whom 70% received D 2 antagonists. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that experience of CINV in previous treatment tended to be associated with vomiting (hazard ratio [HR]: 7.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-58.5, P = 0.07), whereas prophylactic antiemetic administration was not (HR: 1.61, 95 CI: 0.50-5.21, P = 0.43). With regard to patient satisfaction, the proportion of patients who were "very satisfied," "satisfied," "slightly satisfied" or "somewhat satisfied" was 81.8%., Conclusions: The low incidence of vomiting and high patient satisfaction suggest that TAS-102 does not require the use of uniform prophylactic antiemetic treatments. However, patients with the experience of CINV in previous treatment might require prophylactic antiemetic treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2015 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of moderate emetic potential., Methods: A systematic literature review was completed using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases. The literature search was done from June 2015 to January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of moderate emetic potential., Results: Of 342 papers identified, 19 were relevant to update recommendations about managing antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic cancer treatment regimens of moderate emetic potential. Important practice changing updates include the use of emetic prophylaxis based on a triple combination of neurokinin (NK) 1 receptor antagonist, 5-HT 3 receptor antagonist, and steroids for patients undergoing carboplatin (AUC ≥ 5) and women < 50 years of age receiving oxaliplatin-based treatment. A double combination of 5-HT 3 receptor antagonist and steroids remains the recommended prophylaxis for other MEC. Based on the data in the literature, it is recommended that the administration of steroids should be limited to day 1 in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, due to the demonstration of non-inferiority between the different regimens. More data is needed on the emetogenicity of new agents at moderate emetogenic risk. Of particular interest would be antiemetic studies with the agents sacituzumab-govitecan and trastuzumab-deruxtecan. Experience to date with these agents indicate an emetogenic potential comparable to carboplatin > AUC 5. Future studies should systematically include patient-related risk assessment in order to define the risk of emesis with MEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy and improve the guidelines for new drugs., Conclusion: This antiemetic MASCC-ESMO guideline update includes new recommendations considering individual risk factors and the optimization of supportive anti-emetic treatments., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX), a standard chemotherapy regimen for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), is expected to be associated with a higher risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Herein, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a three-drug combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3RA), dexamethasone (DEX), and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists (NK1RA) for the prevention of CINV during mFFX therapy., Methods: This study enrolled patients with APC who received mFFX as initial therapy with a combination of 5HT3RA, DEX, and NK1RA as antiemetic prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate during cycle 1, which was defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication use during the overall period (0-120 h). Safety was also evaluated with a focus on hyperglycemia, which is a concern in patients with APC., Results: Seventy patients were eligible for this retrospective analysis. The CR rate during the overall period was 51.4%. Significant nausea, defined as grade 2 or higher, peaked to 77.1% on days 4-5, but remained above 65% until day 7. Hyperglycemia occurred in 37.1% of patients, and 34.3% were grade 3 hyperglycemia., Conclusions: CINV induced by mFFX was poorly controlled even with prophylactic antiemetic therapy using 5HT3RA, DEX, and NK1RA, and was found to persist beyond 5 days. Enhanced antiemetic measures for mFFX are desirable. However, in patients with diabetes mellitus complications, sparing of steroids and glycemic control should be considered., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Outpatient cancer chemotherapy may lead to improved quality of life (QOL) by allowing treatment to continue without impairing the social lives of patients compared with hospitalization. However, the occurrence of serious adverse events may cause a decline in QOL. We investigated the relationship between outpatient chemotherapy-induced adverse events and QOL., Methods: A single-center retrospective descriptive study was conducted in patients who received outpatient chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital (Gifu, Japan) between September 2017 and December 2018. The utility values of QOL, type and severity of adverse events, type of cancer, chemotherapy regimen, and other patient demographics were analyzed. Adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. QOL was evaluated using the Japanese version of the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L). Associations between the EQ-5D-5L utility value and serious adverse events were assessed using adjusted (age and sex) odds ratios obtained with a proportional odds logistic regression model., Results: Data from 1008 patients who received 4695 chemotherapy cycles were analyzed. According to proportional odds logistic regression, the adverse events that significantly correlated with a decreased EQ-5D-5L utility value were malaise, edema of the limbs, peripheral neuropathy, pruritus, and dry skin. Based on the proportional odds logistic analysis, neither cancer type nor anticancer drugs were significantly correlated with the EQ-5D-5L utility value in patients who received chemotherapy. Pharmaceutical care for peripheral neuropathy significantly improved patients' EQ-5D-5L utility value from 0.747 to 0.776 (P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Adverse events (i.e., peripheral neuropathy, malaise, and edema of the limbs) are significantly correlated with a decrease in QOL, regardless of the type of cancer or anticancer drugs used. Pharmaceutical care provided by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians may improve QOL.

Background: Opioid analgesics possess a number of side effects, among which constipation and nausea/vomiting occur most frequently. Although pretreatment with laxatives and antiemetics for the prophylaxis of opioid-induced constipation and nausea/vomiting, respectively, is recommended, such side effects are still a matter of concern in clinical setting., Methods: We first surveyed the prevalence of premedication in 83 cancer patients who took opioid analgesics and the incidence of such side effects. Subsequently, intervention was carried out to promote premedication, and the effectiveness of the intervention was evaluated in 107 patients., Results: Prophylactic treatment with laxatives and antiemetics were conducted in 57% and 52%, respectively. The most frequently prescribed laxatives and antiemetics were magnesium oxide in combination with pantethine, a mild stimulant laxative, and prochlorperazine, respectively. The lack of premedication increased the risk of constipation (odds ratio, 5.25; 95% confidence intervals, 1.93-14.31; p = 0.001) and vomiting (4.67, 1.04-21.04; p = 0.045). Intervention such as provision of drug information to physicians, verification of prescription orders, and instructions to patients increased the rates of prophylactic medications to 93% (p < 0.001) for laxatives and 81% (p < 0.001) for antiemetics. The incidence of side effects was lowered from 36% to 9% (p < 0.001) for constipation, from 28% to 17% for nausea (p = 0.077), and from 16% to 4% for vomiting (p = 0.0085)., Conclusion: Intervention to promote prophylactic medication was highly effective in reducing the risk of opioid-induced constipation and nausea/vomiting.