Search

Introduction: This paper presents an oral history from the mid-1980s to 2009 of the start and evolution of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) as seen through the recollections of the founders and early leaders. The growth of the supportive cancer care movement and MASCC's contribution to oncology supportive care is described.Discussion: As science was making progress towards better cancer treatment, a group of professionals began to research ways to prevent or mitigate the symptoms and side effects that accompany the disease and its treatments. Joining forces, they created an international, multidisciplinary organization to address and promulgate evidence-based practices of cancer supportive care. Through annual international scientific symposia, a peer-reviewed journal, an accessible website, and study group projects such as guidelines and tools, MASCC is accomplishing its mission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This position paper, written on behalf of the MASCC Psychosocial Study Group, reviews the most common psychosocial concerns and needs of cancer patients during all phases of the cancer continuum, from diagnosis to death or survivorship. Developments in psychosocial care at both individual and systems levels are surveyed and summarized, along with gaps in knowledge and research and needed improvements in the dissemination and application of acquired knowledge and expertise. The roles of culture, spirituality, and religion as part of psychosocial care are reviewed, along with families' and caregivers' specific psychosocial concerns and needs, and areas of needed psychosocial interventions in supportive cancer care. Deficits in recognizing and meeting patients' psychosocial needs at the system level are examined, and international guidelines and models of psychosocial care are reviewed, including their potential applications to local contexts. The paper calls for a shift to a new paradigm of care through adoption of an integrated approach to identify and meet the psychosocial needs of cancer patients and survivors as part of supportive care worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

First-generation serotonin receptor antagonists greatly improved the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the 1990s. A new class of agents, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, was introduced in March 2003 and produced even greater control of CINV when used in combination with a serotonin receptor antagonist and a corticosteroid. In July 2003, palonosetron, a new second-generation serotonin receptor antagonist that has greater potency and a longer half-life than first-generation serotonin receptor antagonists, was introduced. This clinical update reviews studies that were conducted to evaluate these new agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can be prevented in most patients with use of guideline-recommended antiemetic regimens. However, studies have suggested that adherence to antiemetic guidelines is suboptimal. Oncology nurses, as part of a multidisciplinary team, can help promote appropriate antiemetic prophylaxis. Therefore, nurses were surveyed to assess antiemetic guideline awareness and practice patterns of antiemetic use, determine adherence to guideline recommendations, and query barriers to adherence., Methods: In September 2015, 531 US-based oncology nurses participated in an online survey administered and analyzed by ONS:Edge., Results: Nurses were most familiar with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (73%) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (48%) antiemetic guidelines. While most (77%) felt that antiemetics prescribed were consistent with guideline recommendations, practice patterns of antiemetic use revealed low adherence to those guidelines, particularly during the delayed (25-120 h) phase following highly emetogenic chemotherapy, where only 25% of nurses reported administration of guideline-recommended agents. Overutilization of phenothiazines and benzodiazepines was common. Only 17% of respondents reported that most (> 75%) of their patients have CINV optimally controlled; 39% reported between 6 and 20% of patients have an alteration in their chemotherapy due to CINV, and reports of emergency department/hospital visits due to poorly controlled CINV were high. The predominant barrier interfering guideline-recommended antiemetic prophylaxis was reported as physician preference (71%)., Conclusions: This survey revealed an opportunity to increase awareness of antiemetic guidelines and a critical need to address barriers interfering with utilization of guideline-recommended antiemetic agents in order to optimize CINV control for patients undergoing emetogenic chemotherapy.

Purpose: The purpose of this review is to update the MASCC (Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer) guidelines for controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential., Methods: The antiemetic study group of MASCC met in Copenhagen in 2015 to review the MASCC antiemetic guidelines. A subgroup performed a systematic literature review on antiemetics for low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC) and chemotherapy of minimal emetic potential and the chair presented the update recommendation to the whole group for discussion. They then voted with an aim of achieving 67 % or greater consensus., Results: For patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy, a single antiemetic such as dexamethasone, a 5HT3 receptor antagonist, or a dopamine receptor antagonist may be considered for prophylaxis of acute emesis. For patients receiving chemotherapy of minimal emetogenicity, no antiemetic should be routinely administered. If patients vomit, they should be treated as for chemotherapy of low emetic potential. No antiemetic should be administered for prevention of delayed nausea and vomiting induced by low or minimally emetogenic chemotherapy., Conclusions: More research is needed to determine the incidence of emesis, particularly delayed emesis, in the LEC group. Prospective studies are required to evaluate antiemetic strategies. The risk of emesis within LEC may be more accurately determined by adding the patient risk factors for emesis to those of the chemotherapy drugs. Improved strategies for promoting adherence to guidelines are required.

Huge advances have been made in cancer treatments over recent decades; however, significant disparities still exist in the developed world on the basis of race, socioeconomic status, education level, geographical location, and immigration status and in the United States, insurance status. Cancer disparities persist in the continuum of cancer care from risk factors, screening, diagnosis, treatment, survivorship, and end-of-life care. The causes of disparities are complex and multifactorial. The MASCC (Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer) Education Study Group would like to propose a framework of cancer disparities from a social perspective utilizing "social determinants of health" as delineated by the World Health Organization and highlight an unmet need for research and policy innovations to address cancer disparities in developed world.

Background: Clinicians are challenged to find ways to assess and measure adherence to oral agents for cancer (OACs)., Objectives: The purpose of this article is to report on available ways to assess and measure medication adherence by patients with cancer., Methods: Tools examined include the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) and the Adherence Estimator, which are able to predict risk of nonadherence. Adherence Starts With Knowledge (ASK®)-12 and the Brief Adherence Rating Scale (BARS) are likely to be effective for predicting nonadherence and measuring adherence rates., Findings: Additional research needs to focus on the testing of reliable and valid tools that are sensitive and specific to patients with cancer who are prescribed OACs. The authors found that the MMAS and Adherence Estimator tools may be useful at predicting risk of medication nonadherence, and the ASK-12 and BARS may be useful for measuring rates of adherence. Tools could be modified to a specific clinical setting and used in a standardized format so that nurses can assess risk of medication nonadherence and measure adherence rates of OACs.

Aim: This study aimed to determine how aprepitant affects the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) on daily activities during highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC)., Patients & Methods: Patients received aprepitant plus standard antiemetic therapy (ondansetron plus dexamethasone) or standard antiemetic therapy alone. Data were analyzed from pooled data of two Phase III randomized, double-blind HEC trials and one MEC trial. Patients completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaire., Results: A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving aprepitant reported no or minimal CINV impact on daily life (overall total Functional Living Index-Emesis score >6) compared with those receiving standard therapy alone (HEC: 74.4 vs 63.9%, respectively; p < 0.01; MEC: 73.4 vs 66.3%; p < 0.05). In HEC, favorable responses to aprepitant treatment persisted in nausea (70.2 vs 60.9%) and vomiting domains (84.6 vs 68.7%; both p < 0.01). Similar results were seen in MEC., Conclusion: Addition of aprepitant reduced CINV impact on daily life compared with standard antiemetic therapy.

One of the unresolved design issues for clinical trials with quality of life (QOL) as an endpoint is the frequency of measurement in patients with stage III and IV lung cancer. In a retrospective review of clinical trials, the QOL interval varied widely from 1 to 12 weeks during treatment. During follow-up, the interval was generally 2 to 3 months or not at all. The purpose of this methodological study was to determine an appropriate interval for QOL serial measurement based on prospectively collected data. The 20 patients for this study were part of a phase I/I study using combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). They were typical of patients in lung cancer clinical trials, with a median age of 67 (interquartile range: 58, 72) years, the majority were male (13, 65%), and a baseline median Karnofsky performance status was 80 (interquartile range: 70%, 90%). The primary instrument, developed in 1985, was the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) patient form, a 9-item self-report and site-specific QOL measure. The method, outcome, and implication of these findings to research are presented for establishing a method for obtaining an appropriate serial measurement interval for QOL during therapy in clinical trials. Based on the findings of this study, an every 3-week QOL assessment for patients with advanced NSCLC provides data similar to more frequent evaluation (94% of data preserved compared to twice-weekly assessment, 95% confidence interval, 86-98%, p=0.05). Less frequent assessment (every 4 or every 6 weeks) retained less than 85% of the data, which is the recommended minimum adequacy rate. Retaining a high percentage of QOL information may lessen the effect of measurement bias due to patient attrition and may give more validity to QOL studies.

First-generation serotonin receptor antagonists greatly improved the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the 1990s. A new class of agents, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, was introduced in March 2003 and produced even greater control of CINV when used in combination with a serotonin receptor antagonist and a corticosteroid. In July 2003, palonosetron, a new second-generation serotonin receptor antagonist that has greater potency and a longer half-life than first-generation serotonin receptor antagonists, was introduced. This clinical update reviews studies that were conducted to evaluate these new agents.

This article reviews a new class of antiemetic agents, the neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonists (RAs). Clinical trials of an NK-1 RA, aprepitant, are ongoing.

Nausea and vomiting (N&V) is among the most distressing side effects of chemotherapy, despite the development of more efficacious antiemetic agents. As many as 60% of patients who receive cancer chemotherapy experience some degree of N&V. However, the actual incidence is difficult to determine with accuracy because of the variety of drugs, doses, and health conditions of the patients who receive cancer treatments. This article examines the state of the science related to chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and reviews both pharmacologic and behavioral strategies that have demonstrated efficacy in managing these distressing symptoms.

A cancer diagnosis impacts the entire family unit, but children are especially vulnerable. In the past, families and professionals did not share information or allow for children to express their feelings or to be involved. Children have the right to know and the need to know the truth. Interventions should be based on both the developmental stage of the child and the stage of the illness. Approaches by disease phase and developmental stage are discussed. Goals include maintaining family stability, preparing children for what may happen, allowing for flexible communication, and preventing serious psychosocial sequelae.

Purposes/objectives: To determine the effect of duration of infusion time on venous irritation in patients receiving vinorelbine tartrate (Navelbine, Burroughs Wellcome Co., Research Triangle Park, NC) in combination with cisplatin or mitomycin., Design: Prospective and descriptive., Setting: Five outpatient hematology/oncology units in southern Louisiana and Mississippi., Sample: 96 patients receiving vinorelbine in combination with cisplatin or mitomycin through a peripheral vein., Method: Nurses completed the Venous Irritation Record (VIR), on which they documented the incidence of irritation reactions on the day of infusion as well as 24 hours and one to two weeks later., Main Research Variables: Incidence and severity of venous irritation as well as the duration of administration., Findings: Significantly lower incidence of venous irritation at 6-10 minute infusion rate was observed (p < 0.05). No difference in incidence was observed when vinorelbine was given with a vesicant (mitomycin) or a nonvesicant (cisplatin) drug., Conclusions: Although venous irritation is a problem associated with peripherally administered vinorelbine, it does not necessitate central line placement. Incidence of this problem can be reduced with a shorter duration of administration. The VIR was feasible, easy to use, and could be adapted for other drugs and other toxicities. The National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria are not adequate for grading venous irritation reactions., Implications for Nursing Practice: Vinorelbine should be administered in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations as a 6-10 minute infusion. Determination of this rate came as a result of clinical nursing research. Nurses involved in clinical trials can and should play a role in describing emergent toxicities and investigating methods to prevent or minimize those toxicities.

This presentation challenges the purveyors of the importance of "positive thinking" in the cure of cancer. Psychological support should allow the patient to come to terms with his or her situation in a way that works for that individual within a caring and realistic environment. In no way should psychological support add an extra burden to an already devastated patient. By forcing "positive mental attitude", health-care professionals are not allowing patients to face reality. Promoters of the "cure" that comes with positive thinking are quoted, as well as authors who question the promoters' intent and outcome. It is felt that "positive thinking" may be appropriate as one of many successful coping strategies. To attribute more to it or, worse, to insist that patients believe in its power to cure may be courting emotional disaster.

In the future, the largest proportional increase in the population will be among minority groups. To date, there are a number of studies which document the disparities in cancer incidence and survival existing between white Americans and minorities, especially African Americans. African Americans have the highest cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States. Much of this difference can be directly related to socioeconomic status. There are also cultural differences which result in differing attitudes towards health care. In the future, interventions designed to encourage cancer prevention and screening behaviors must seek to overcome the barriers to access in a culturally sensitive fashion.