Search

To optimize recognition and management of nausea in children with cancer using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and to identify preferences of children with cancer regarding two validated tools: the Baxter Retching Faces (BARF) scale and the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool (PeNAT). This quantitative descriptive cross-sectional study (n = 34) used bespoke questionnaires to measure feasibility and face validity of the BARF and the PeNAT. Feasibility included the items: understanding, ease of use, and communication. Face validity was studied in terms of the degree in which the faces of both PROMs corresponded with children's feelings of nausea. A descriptive and comparative analysis of the data was performed. Both the BARF and the PeNAT were rated by the children as feasible, and no significant differences were found. However, regarding the item communication, the PeNAT did not reach the cut-off value (≥80% of all children scored neutral, agree or totally agree on the Likert scale). Regarding face validity, only the BARF reached the cut-off value and corresponded significantly better with children's feelings of nausea than the PeNAT. According to children with cancer, only the BARF is both feasible and meets criteria for face validity. Therefore, the BARF is recommended as a PROM for reporting nausea in children with cancer. However, possible differences between age groups should be taken into account for future research. This study will help health care professionals in making a patient-centered and informed choice when using a PROM for measuring nausea in children with cancer. • Research emphasizes need for reducing nausea symptoms in children with cancer • Patient reported outcome measurements are beneficial for assessing nausea severity • Children with cancer considered both the BARF and the PeNAT as feasible tools • The BARF corresponded better with the children's feelings of nausea • Children's preferences should guide nurses in choosing a tool for measuring nausea [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rising cure rates in pediatric cancer patients warrants an increased attention toward the long‐term consequences of the diagnosis and treatment in survivors. Chemotherapeutic agents can be gonadotoxic, rendering them at risk for infertility post‐survival. While semen cryopreservation is an option that can be provided for most (post)pubertal boys before treatment, this is unfortunately not an option prepubertal in age, simply due to the lack of spermatogenesis. Over the last couple of years, studies have thus focused on better understanding the testis niche in response to various chemotherapeutic agents that are commonly administered and their direct and indirect impact on the germ cell populations. These are generally compounds that have a high risk of infertility and have been classified into risk categories in curated fertility guidelines. However, with it comes the lack of evidence and the challenge of using informative models and conditions most reflective of the physiological scenario, in short, the appropriate study designs for clinically relevant outcomes. Besides, the exact mechanism(s) of action for many of these "risk" compounds as well as other agents is unclear. Understanding their behavior and effect on the testis niche will pave the way for incorporating new strategies to ultimately combat infertility. Of the various drug classes, alkylating agents pose the highest risk of gonadotoxicity as per previously established studies as well as risk stratification guidelines. Therefore, this review will summarize the findings in the field of male fertility concerning gonadotoxicity of akylating agents as a result of chemotherapy exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study describes chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) control rates in pediatric and adult patients who did or did not receive guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review of studies published in 2000 or later that evaluated CINV control in patients receiving guideline-consistent vs. guideline-inconsistent CINV prophylaxis and reported at least one CINV-related patient outcome. Studies were excluded if the guideline evaluated was not publicly available or not developed by a professional organization. Over-prophylaxis was defined as antiemetic use recommended for a higher level of chemotherapy emetogenicity than a patient was receiving. Results: We identified 7060 citations and retrieved 141 publications for full-text evaluation. Of these, 21 publications (14 prospective and seven retrospective studies) evaluating guidelines developed by six organizations were included. The terms used to describe CINV endpoints and definition of guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis varied among studies. Included studies either did not address over-prophylaxis in their definition of guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis (48%; 10/21) or defined it as guideline-inconsistent (38%; 8/21) or guideline-consistent (3/21; 14%). Eleven included studies (52%; 11/21) reported a clinically meaningful improvement in at least one CINV endpoint in patients receiving guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis. Ten reported a statistically significant improvement. Conclusions: This evidence supports the use of guideline-consistent prophylaxis to optimize CINV control. Institutions caring for patients with cancer should systematically adapt CINV CPGs for local implementation and routinely evaluate CINV outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In current clinical practice, recommendations regarding restrictions in daily life for children with cancer are often lacking or not evidence-based. Critically reviewing the evidence and formulating recommendations are therefore of great importance as social restrictions (e.g., swimming, school attendance, sports) can impair the quality of life of these children severely. Therefore, our aim was to develop a clinical practice guideline for clinicians, children, and their parents regarding social restrictions in children with cancer. Methods: A comprehensive multidisciplinary panel was assembled, comprising 21 professionals and patient representatives. A systematic literature review was performed, including dual appraisal of all citations. The GRADE methodology was used to extract, summarize, and assess the evidence. Multiple in-person meetings were held to rank outcomes, discuss evidence, complete evidence-to-decision frameworks, and formulate recommendations. Final recommendations were unanimously supported by all panel members. Results: Six studies, including 758 children, formed the evidence base for the recommendations. Given the scarcity of the available evidence and various designs of studies in children with cancer, additional evidence was extracted from adult oncology guidelines, and shared expert opinions were utilized. In total, 14 recommendations were formulated of which multiple result in changes in current policy and standard of practice in the Netherlands. Topics covered in this guideline are swimming, having pets, visiting the zoo or farm, performing sports or high-velocity events, attending school or kindergarten, and use of public transport. This guideline is not intended to provide recommendations for patients after end of treatment, for palliative care settings, or for children undergoing a stem cell transplantation. Conclusions: In this clinical practice guideline, we provide recommendations regarding restrictions in daily life in children with cancer. These include evidence-based recommendations and, in the absence of sufficient evidence, recommendations based on expert evidence. With these recommendations, we provide guidance for clinicians, children, and parents and contribute to improving quality of life for children with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Infertility is an important late effect of childhood cancer treatment. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) is established as a safe procedure to preserve gonadal tissue in (pre)pubertal girls with cancer at high risk for infertility. However, it is unclear whether elective laparoscopic OTC can also be performed safely in infants <1 year with cancer. This systematic review aims to evaluate the reported risks in infants undergoing elective laparoscopy regarding mortality, and/or critical events (including resuscitation, circulatory, respiratory, neurotoxic, other) during and shortly after surgery. Methods: This systematic review followed the Preferred reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. A systematic literature search in the databases Pubmed and EMbase was performed and updated on February 15th, 2023. Search terms included ‘infants’, ‘intubation’, ‘laparoscopy’, ‘mortality’, ‘critical events’, ‘comorbidities’ and their synonyms. Papers published in English since 2000 and describing at least 50 patients under the age of 1 year undergoing laparoscopic surgery were included. Articles were excluded when the majority of patients had congenital abnormalities. Quality of the studies was assessed using the QUIPS risk of bias tool. Results: The Pubmed and Embase databases yielded a total of 12,401 unique articles, which after screening on title and abstract resulted in 471 articles to be selected for full text screening. Ten articles met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review, which included 1778 infants <1 years undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery. Mortality occurred once (death not surgery-related), resuscitation in none and critical events in 53/1778 of the procedures. Conclusion: The results from this review illustrate that morbidity and mortality in infants without extensive comorbidities during and just after elective laparoscopic procedures seem limited, indicating that the advantages of performing elective laparoscopic OTC for infants with cancer at high risk of gonadal damage may outweigh the anesthetic and surgical risks of laparoscopic surgery in this age group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability of the central line‐associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in pediatric oncology patients. Methods: Bacteremia episodes from 2020 to 2022 from a prospective cohort of pediatric oncology patients with a central venous catheter were included. Episodes were classified by three medical experts following the CLABSI criteria as either a CLABSI or non‐CLABSI (i.e., contamination, other infection source, or mucosal barrier injury‐laboratory confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI‐LCBI)). Subsequently, they were asked if and why they (dis)agreed with this diagnosis following the criteria. The primary outcome was the percentage of episodes where the experts clinically disagreed with the diagnosis given following the CLABSI criteria. Results: Overall, 84 bacteremia episodes in 71 patients were evaluated. Following the CLABSI criteria, 34 (40%) episodes were classified as CLABSIs and 50 (60%) as non‐CLABSIs. In 11 (13%) cases the experts clinically disagreed with the diagnosis following the CLABSI criteria. The discrepancy between the CLABSI criteria and clinical diagnosis was significant; McNemar's test p <.01. Disagreement by the experts with the CLABSI criteria mostly occurred when the experts found an MBI‐LCBI a more plausible cause of the bacteremia than a CLABSI due to the presence of a gram negative bacteremia (Pseudomonas aeruginosa n = 3) and/or mucositis. Conclusions: A discrepancy between the CLABSI criteria and the evaluation of the experts was observed. Adding Pseudomonas aeruginosa as an MBI pathogen and incorporating the presence of mucositis in the MBI‐LCBI criteria, might increase the applicability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Aprepitant is used for the treatment of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting. A liquid formulation is needed for treatment of young children. However, the commercial (powder for) suspension was not available worldwide for a prolonged period of time and, therefore, a 10 mg/mL aprepitant oral suspension was extemporarily prepared to prevent suboptimal antiemetic treatment. The current pharmacokinetic study was developed to investigate whether this extemporaneous oral suspension offers an appropriate treatment option. Methods: From 49 pediatric patients (0.7–17.9 years) 235 plasma concentrations were collected. Patients were either treated with our extemporaneous oral suspension (n = 26; 53%), commercially available capsules (n = 18; 37%), or the intravenous prodrug formulation of aprepitant (fosaprepitant, n = 5; 10%). Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling. Results: A one-compartment model adequately described the pharmacokinetics of aprepitant in children. The bioavailability of the extemporaneous oral suspension was not significantly different to that of the capsules (P = 0.26). The observed bioavailability throughout the total population was 83% (95% CI 69%-97%). The absorption of the extemporaneous oral suspension was 39.4% (95%CI 19.5–57.4%) faster than that of capsules (mean absorption time of 1.78 h (95%CI 1.32–2.35), but was comparable to that of the commercial oral suspension. The median area under the curve after (fos)aprepitant was 22.2 mg/L*h (range 8.9–50.3 mg/L*h) on day 1. Conclusion: Our extemporaneous oral suspension is an adequate alternative for the commercially (un)available oral suspension in young children. An adequate exposure to aprepitant in children was yielded and the bioavailability of the extemporaneous suspension was comparable to capsules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]