Emetogenic Potential Research Articles

Discovery of novel N2-indazole derivatives as phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic and progressive condition with a significant global burden. Currently, available treatments primarily provide symptomatic relief and retard disease progression, yet they do not offer a cure and are frequently associated with adverse effects. Therefore, the discovery of new targets and therapeutic drugs for IBD is crucial. Phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitors have emerged as promising candidates in the search for effective IBD treatments, although dose-dependent side effects hamper their clinical utility. In this study, building upon heterocyclic biaryl derivatives (TPA16), we designed and synthesized a series of N2-substituted indazole-based PDE4D inhibitors, emphasizing improving safety profiles. An enzyme activity screening discovered an optimized compound, LZ-14 (Z21115), which exhibited high PDE4D7 (IC50 = 10.5 nM) inhibitory activity and good selectivity. More interestingly, LZ-14 has demonstrated promising effects in treating IBD in mouse models by improving the inflammatory response and colon injury. Furthermore, LZ-14 displayed low emetogenic potential in ketamine/xylazine anesthesia mice alternative models.

Evaluation of Antiemetic Consistency in Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Among NHL Patients in Sana'a, Yemen.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a prevalent and distressing adverse effect that can negatively affect a patient's quality of life and treatment adherence. This study aimed to evaluate the consistency of antiemetic use with standard guidelines and to examine the factors influencing it. This cross-sectional study was conducted at the National Oncology Center (NOC) of Al-Jomhouri Teaching Hospital, Sana'a, Yemen, from November 2022 to September 2023. Demographic data, chemotherapy and antiemetic regimens, dosages, and patient-related risk factors were collected via direct interviews, medical records, and treatment charts. This study evaluated the consistency of antiemetic practices among non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL) patients using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. The chi-squared test and regression were used to determine the factors associated with guideline consistency. A total of 251 patients with NHL were recruited for the study; 57.4% were male and 60.6% were aged between 18-49. Most of the patients received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (81.3%). The overall consistency with the NCCN guidelines was only 23.9%, with antiemetic drug selection and dosage reported inconsistently in 62.9% and 16.7% of patients, respectively. Furthermore, 62.5% of the patients received an under-prescribed antiemetic prophylactic regimen. Treatment duration, number of chemotherapy cycles, emetogenic risk potential, and overall patient risk, as well as age, sex, and marital status, were significantly associated with guideline inconsistency (p < 0.05). This study revealed a notable gap in the consistency of antiemetic prescriptions among patients with NHL. Inappropriate drug selection, dosing, and under-prescription are common problems. Patient regimen risk factors significantly influenced the consistency of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Personalized approaches are essential to enhance adherence to guidelines and improve antiemetic strategies.

Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA; Akynzeo®) combination in prevention of the nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer receiving anthracyclinbased chemotherapy

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a common problem during cancer treatment, especially in breast cancer patients with anthracycline/cyclophosphamide (ас) chemotherapy. Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA; Akynzeo®) is a fixed-dose combination of two drugs (netupitant, a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist; and palonosetron, a serotonin 3 receptor antagonist) which target two diferent signalling pathways involved in the induction of vomiting. Approved for use in the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults, netupitant/palonosetron is given orally or via intravenous infusion as a single dose prior to chemotherapy. In clinical trials, high proportions of patients who received netupitant/palonosetron (used in combination with the corticosteroid dexamethasone) prior to chemotherapy reported no vomiting, no requirement for rescue medication, and no signifcant nausea in the 5 days post chemotherapy. Both the oral and intravenous formulations of the drug combination are well tolerated. Thus, netupitant/palonosetron is a simple, convenient and efective drug combination for the prevention of acute and delayed xhemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy that has a moderate to high emetogenic potential.

The role of NEPA, a combination of netupitant and palonosetron, in the prevention of nausea and vomiting: case report and literature review

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most common complications of the systemic anticancer treatment. The manifestations of this complication are largely determined by subjective perceptions and individual characteristics of patients, but this complication may have unprecedented negative impact on the quality of life of cancer patients. There were significant advances in CINV prophylaxis in the recent decades, with many effective antiemetic drugs entering routine clinical practice. Current clinical guidelines for antiemetic therapy provide various possible strategies for CINV prevention, but do not give any specific guidance on the selection of individual agents within each class of emetogenic potential. NEPA, which is a fixed-dose combination of NK1-antagonist netupitant and 5-HT3 antagonist palonosteron, is the most recent antiemetic drug in clinical practice. This article reviews current data on the effectiveness of this drug and aims to define its “niche” in antiemetic therapy. The results of historical and most relevant studies demonstrating the effectiveness of NEPA in CINV prevention, pharmacological features of the drug and its potential advantages are discussed. The role of the drug in the existing therapeutic arsenal was evaluated using the example of a clinical report of treatment of a patient with an aggravated history (type 2 diabetes mellitus with poorly controlled hyperglycaemia) The patient achieved a complete response to the antiemetic therapy: no episodes of vomiting during treatment, the severity of nausea did not exceed the 1st grade, no additional prescription of antiemetic drugs was required.

Antiemetics in hematopoietic cell transplantation:

Antiemetics play a key role in hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). High-dose chemotherapy and total body irradiation (TBI) have a high emetogenic potential, and vomiting and nausea during conditioning regimen and thereafter impair oral intake, which can lead to weight loss, hyperglycemia due to parenteral nutrition, infectious disease, and increased transplant-related mortality. We searched for randomized trials on antiemetics in HCT. Triplet prophylaxis with a 5-HT antagonist, an NK-1 antagonist, and dexamethasone is a common practice in hematopoietic cell transplantation. Prophylaxis is usually given during the conditioning regimen and sometimes up to a few days later. NK-1 antagonist usage is supported by randomized trials. Olanzapine reduces nauseas, based on a randomized trial. Although recommended by the ASCO guideline, the use of dexamethasone should be considered controversial given the higher incidence of adverse events with this medication in a randomized study and given a possible higher risk of infections, and therefore dexamethasone should be used with caution as an antiemetic in hematopoietic cell transplantation. Metoclopramide, diphenhydramine, and lorazepam are other drugs that also have antiemetic activity, have been used in HCT, and can be used in selected cases.

Doublet or Triplet Antiemetic Prophylaxis for Nausea and Vomiting Induced by Trastuzumab Deruxtecan: an Open-Label, Randomized, and Multicenter Exploratory Phase 2 Study.

Background: Trastuzumab deruxtecan is classified as an anticancer agent that poses a moderate emetic risk in the international guidelines for antiemetic therapy. The guidelines recommend emesis prophylaxis using a two-drug combination therapy comprising a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) and dexamethasone (DEX). However, the high incidence of nausea and vomiting associated with trastuzumab deruxtecan is problematic. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline version 1.2023 classified trastuzumab deruxtecan as having a high risk of emesis and changed its recommendation to a triplet regimen including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA). However, the emetogenic potential of trastuzumab-deruxtecan and the optimal antiemetic prophylaxis are controversial. Hence, this exploratory phase 2 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of treatment comprising 5-HT3RA and DEX with or without a NK1RA in preventing trastuzumab deruxtecan-induced nausea and vomiting. Methods: We conducted an open-label and randomized exploratory phase 2 study at 14 centers in Japan. Patients with breast cancer who were scheduled to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly assigned to receive granisetron and DEX (arm GD) or granisetron, DEX, and aprepitant (fosaprepitant; arm GDA). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; no emesis or no rescue therapy) during the overall phase (120 h after the start of trastuzumab deruxtecan). Results: Between September 2020 and March 2023, 40 patients were randomly assigned to the GD (n = 19) or GDA (n = 21) arm. In the GDA arm, one patient who did not complete the use of the rescue medication listed in the diary was excluded from the efficacy analysis, which included the use of rescue medication. The CR rates during the overall phase were 36.8% and 70.0% in the GD and GDA arms, respectively (odds ratio 0.1334; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0232-0.7672; P = 0.0190), with a difference of 33.2%. No grade 3 or 4 toxicity related to antiemetic therapy was observed. Conclusions: Patients receiving trastuzumab deruxtecan require triple therapy, including mandatory NK1RA administration.

1573P Developing a patient-related predictive model for the occurrence of CINV (NOGGO-EMRISK trial): Prospective, multicentre study in Germany

Despite many years of clinical research, nausea and vomiting remain one of the most common side effects related to chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to determine non-pharmacological, patient-related risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and to develop a unique predictive score in patients with gynaecological cancers planned for chemotherapy. A research-based questionnaire of 27 risk factors was created. It was handed out to chemotherapy naïve patients and data on nausea and vomiting from at least 3 cycles of therapy was collected. Variable selection via stepwise and LASSO regression combined with patients’ history was used to identify a small set of questions with high predictive power. Bayesian logistic regression (a risk prediction model) was implemented with a cut-off chosen to yield a sensitivity of 80%. Area under the curve analysis (AUC) was conducted, and accuracy of prediction was calculated. A total of 191 patients were enrolled. The most frequent diagnosis was ovarian cancer (69%) and the most frequent chemotherapy the carboplatinum/paclitaxel combination (57.7%). The most important predictive factors for CINV were: emetogenic potential of the therapy, educational status, nausea and vomiting due to other medication, motion sickness, anxiety from therapy in general and anxiety from nausea due to therapy. All questions were answered by 132 (69.1%) patients. Among those, 97 (68%) reported nausea or vomiting. The AUC of the predictive score based on the above mentioned factors was 0.741, with a sensitivity of 80.4%, a specificity of 51.4% and an overall accuracy of 72.7%. Until now, a patient-related predictive model for the occurrence of CINV is missing. The score featured in our study showed a very promising predictive power and is currently under validation in the next phase of the trial.

Effectiveness of NEPA, an oral fixed-dose combination of NEtupitant and PAlonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea-vomiting in patient receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens.

e24090 Background: Patients receiving Highly Emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) are &gt; 90% risk of nausea-vomiting due to the drug's emetogenic potential and patient-related factors such as young age, female gender, low/no alcohol, H/O morning sickness and use of alternative medications. The current study was designed to assess the effectiveness of NEPA in patients receiving HEC in a real-world setting in India. Methods: An open-label, single-arm, prospective study among chemonaive patients was conducted across six centers from April 2019 to December 2021 after approval from each institutional ethics committee (CTRI/2020/02/023586). Complete response and treatment-emergent adverse events were the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included completion protection, complete control and severity of nausea. Results: HEC regimens were prescribed in 289 of the 360 patients enrolled in the study. Most common HEC regimen was Anthracycline-Cyclophosphamide (44.2%) followed by Paclitaxel-Carboplatin (17.9%). Average age of study population was 52.8±9.8 yrs. with male: female ratio of 1:2.1. Hypertension (17.6%) and diabetes (12.4%) were common comorbidities. Complete response in acute, delayed and overall phases were 94.4%, 94.8%, and 92.7% respectively. In overall phase, complete protection and complete control was 86.8% and 77.5% respectively. Mild, moderate and severe nausea were reported in 11.7%, 7.6%, and 2.4%, patients respectively. Adverse events were seen in 10(3.4%) patients, with leg pain being the most common 3(0.8%). One serious adverse event, unrelated to the study drug was reported. Conclusions: NEPA was effective and well tolerated in patients on a HEC regimen in the acute, delayed and overall phases with a completed response rate of &gt; 90%. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2020/02/023586. [Table: see text]

Prospective, multicenter study on non-pharmacological, patient related predictive factors of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): A NOGGO-EMRISK trial.

e24107 Background: Despite many years of clinical research and development, nausea and vomiting remain challenging toxicities related to chemotherapy. The aim of our study was assessment of non-pharmacological, patient-related risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and development of unique predictive score in patients with gynaecological malignancies planned for chemotherapy. Methods: A research-based questionnaire of 27 risk factors was generated and provided to patients diagnosed with gynaecological malignancies prior to indicated chemotherapy. The data on nausea and vomiting from at least 3 cycles therapy was collected. Variable selection via stepwise and LASSO regression combined with patients history was used to identify a small set of questions with high predictive power. As risk prediction model, a Bayesian logistic regression was implemented with a cut-off chosen to yield a sensitivity of 80%. Area under the curve analysis (AUC) was conducted, and accuracy of prediction was calculated. Results: In total 191 patients were enrolled. The most frequent diagnosis and chemotherapy was ovarian cancer (69%) and carboplatinum/paclitaxel combination (57.7%), respectively. Six factors (emetogenic potential of the therapy, educational status, nausea and vomiting due to other medication, motion sickness, anxiety from therapy in general and anxiety from nausea due to therapy) were identified as most important predictive factors. All questions were answered by 132 (69.1%) patients. Among those 97 (68%) reported nausea or vomiting. The AUC of the predictive score consisting mentioned factors was 0.741, with a sensitivity of 80.4%, specificity of 51.4% and an overall accuracy of 72.7%. Conclusions: Patients related risk factors are missing in selection of the antiemetic prophylaxis in patients under chemotherapy. Presented predictive score showed very promising predictive power and is going to be validated in further phase of the trial. Clinical trial information: DRKS-ID: DRKS00015151.

FLOT (a chemotherapy regimen for gastric/esophagogastric junction cancer): to be treated as a highly emetogenic regimen or a moderately emetogenic one? Comparison of the emetogenic potential of FLOT versus FOLFOX and TAC regimens.

The current study aimed at investigating the efficacy of aprepitant-containing triple antiemetic regimen in FLOT (fluorouracil + leucovorin + oxaliplatin + docetaxel) recipients as well as the emetogenic potential of FLOT regimen, through comparison of nausea and vomiting rates in a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, FLOT, and a highly emetogenic chemotherapy recipients. Patients planned to receive one of FLOT, FOLFOX (fluorouracil + leucovorin + oxaliplatin/moderate-emetic risk), or TAC (docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide/high-emetic risk) regimens were recruited. All patients were treated with the same triple antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant. A total of 165 chemotherapy-naïve patients (52 FLOT recipients) were eligible to enter the study. At the end of day 5, "complete response" (primary efficacy endpoint) was achieved by 84.6%, 63.5%, and 61.5% of the FLOT-receiving patients in acute, delayed, and overall phases, respectively. A significant difference was seen among the odds of FLOT recipients and FOLFOX recipients concerning "complete response" achievement in delayed (p = 0.014) and overall (p = 0.017) phases, "no emesis" in delayed (p = 0.018) and overall (p = 0.010) phases, and also "complete protection" in acute (p = 0.023), delayed (p = 0.009), and overall (p = 0.006) phases; however, the difference between the odds of FLOT recipients and TAC recipients, in relation to achieving these endpoints, was insignificant. FLOT group showed significantly faster time-to-antiemetic regimen failure and time-to-first emetic episode in comparison with the FOLFOX group, which was insignificant in comparison with the TAC group. According to the findings, FLOT has to be considered as a high-emetic-risk regimen; provided that, as recommended by the antiemetic guidelines towards better management of delayed nausea and vomiting induced by highly emetogenic regimens, executing clinical trials concerning the efficacy of continuing dexamethasone on days 2-4 in aprepitant-containing triple antiemetic regimen schedule is required.

Factors Associated with Chemotherapy Induced Nausea in Cancer Patients: A Case-Control Study

Background: Chemotherapy-induced nausea (CIN) is one of the most common and uncomfortable symptoms in cancer patients, and different factors can be associated with it. Objectives: This study aimed to determine different factors associated with CIN in cancer patients. Methods: A total of 144 cancer patients were selected by convenience sampling. The patients at acute phase of chemotherapy were assigned to case group (n = 58) if they had nausea or to control group (n = 86) if they did not have nausea. The patients' data were collected using a researcher-made questionnaire including items on potential factors for CIN through interviews with the patients and according to their medical records. Logistic regression models were used to conduct data analysis, and the correlations in question were expressed as odds ratio (OR) at 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The results showed that the chance of nausea increased by 6.4, 2.4, 1.2, and 1.5 times in case of expected nausea, pain, carbohydrate intake, and smelling a specific odor, respectively. The increasing nausea-inducing effect of drugs led to increased chance of post-chemotherapy nausea (OR = 2.366). Conclusions: Having pain, expecting nausea, carbohydrate intake, smelling a certain odor, and high emetogenic potential of chemotherapy are effective in the development of CIN.

Association of illness perception with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a Turkish Oncology Group (TOG) study.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) may be linked to the psychological status of cancer patients. Therefore, the authors aimed to better understand the underlying risk factors for CINV using the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. A total of 238 patients were recruited during three cycles of chemotherapy. Patient, disease and treatment characteristics were noted at the onset of chemotherapy. The Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire was administered face-to-face prior to chemotherapy. The relationship between illness perceptions and CINV was analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation. Positive illness perception parameters, including personal and treatment control, were negatively correlated, whereas negative illness perception parameters, including consequences, timeline, identity, concern and emotions, were positively correlated with CINV after adjusting for age, sex and emetogenic potential of chemotherapy (p<0.001). Illness perception may be an underlying risk factor for CINV.

Adherence to guidelines for management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in a tertiary public hospital

Objectives: To assess if the antiemetic prophylaxis prescribed to patients exposed to chemotherapy is following the Antiemesis guideline published by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) version 3.2018. Methods: A medication review was performed, considering antiemetic´s prescriptions of adult patients under treatment with moderate and high emetogenic potential antineoplastic agents, assisted on an outpatient basis in a tertiary public hospital, from May to September 2019. The information contained in the prescriptions was compared with the guideline recommendations in relation to the selection of the therapeutic class of the antiemetic, dose, route of administration, dosage regimen and duration of treatment, with the prophylaxis expected for the acute and delayed phases being evaluated. Results: Were included 87 patients, 38 and 49 of whom used chemotherapy drugs with high and moderate emetogenic potential, respectively. In the prescriptions containing highly emetogenic chemotherapeutic agents, the antiemetic therapy recommended for acute phase prophylaxis was incorrectly prescribed for 9 patients (23.7%), and the problem encountered was dexamethasone underdose (16.7%). In the delayed phase, problems were identified in the prescriptions of 35 patients (92.1%), including the prescription of inappropriate medication (57.4%), since the prescription contained ondansetron, not foreseen by the guideline at this stage, and the need for dexamethasone as an additional drug (18.5%). For 22 patients (44.9%) exposed to moderately emetogenic antineoplastic agents, the acute regimen was incorrectly prescribed, and the main problems identified were dexamethasone overdose (21.2%) and the need for dexamethasone as an additional drug (5.0%). Delayed antiemetic prophylaxis was incorrectly prescribed for 45 of them (91.8%), with ondansetron treatment duration longer than recommended (26.2%), need for dexamethasone or ondansetron as an additional medication (23.7%) and therapeutic duplicity (12.5%) the problems encountered. Conclusion: It is suggested the implementation of strategies aimed at increasing adherence to the guideline’s recommendations by the prescribers, as well as access to medicines considered essential.

Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Short Review on the Role of Netupitant-Palonosetron (NEPA).

IntroductionAntineoplastic drugs may induce several side effects, including chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Two neurotransmitters play a central role in mediating the emetic response: serotonin acting on the 5HT3 receptor and the substance P targeting the NK1 receptor. Indeed, a combination of a 5HT3 receptor antagonist (5HT3-RA) and a NK1 receptor antagonist (NK1-RA) together with dexamethasone has been shown to be very effective. In fact, this combination is actually widely used and recommended for CINV prophylaxis for highly emetogenic cisplatin-based adriamycin/cyclophosphamide (AC) and carboplatin-based regimens. NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) is the only fixed combination antiemetic available and it is composed by the long-lasting second-generation 5HT3-RA palonosetron and the highly selective NK1-RA netupitant.AimThe aims of this short review were to analyze the role of NEPA in CINV prophylaxis and management taking in account the risk factors related to the patient and to the antineoplastic treatment.Evidence ReviewCINV development is not only correlated to the emetogenic potential of the antineoplastic drugs but is also very influenced by the patient characteristics and history, such as gender, age, alcohol intake, nausea during pregnancy and motion sickness. In pivotal and post-registration studies, NEPA has demonstrated to be effective and safe in both highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.ConclusionA proper assessment of both chemotherapy- and patient-related risk factors is paramount to properly evaluate an appropriate prophylaxis of CINV and NEPA by simplifying the therapy, guarantees fully adherence to antiemetic guidelines, and consequently improves the control of CINV, especially in high risk patients.

Adherence to ASCO for Prophylaxis of Acute Chemotherapy- Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Iran.

Introduction:Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the scariest chemotherapy-induced adverse effects. We evaluated the adherence to the 2017 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the latest guideline recommendations, for the management of acute CINV at our institute. Methods:During a 6-months cross-sectional study on outpatient’s cancer patients, we collected data from the prescription documents during temporary hospitalization and compared the results with ASCO guideline recommendations. Results:The most prescribed prophylactic regimens for the management of CINV were combination of aprepitant, granisetron, and dexamethasone and metoclopramide (51.8%). Regarding prescription compatibility in our center with ASCO guideline recommnedations, selection of different regimens for prophylaxis of acute CINV in our institute was compliant in 0 %, 22%, 4%, and 40% of high, moderate, low, and minimal emetogenic potential of chemotherapy regimen groupss, respectively. Conclusion:Although our hospital is a referral and university-affiliated center, adherence to the ASCO guideline recommendations for prophylaxis of CINV was poor.

Systematic analysis of chemotherapy agents for home-based administration.

e14012 Background: Improvement in supportive care medications, feasibility of outpatient management, and regulatory changes have led to a dramatic shift in the primary location of chemotherapy delivery from the inpatient setting to outpatient infusion centers. Over the last decade, centers in Europe and Canada have taken the next logical step – home based chemotherapy infusion. To our knowledge there is no systematic large scale initiative that has transitioned chemotherapy to the home in the United States. In order to implement a home based chemotherapy infusion program, we systematically scored anti-neoplastic agents for ease of administration. Methods: We reviewed all anti-neoplastic agents administered at our infusion center. Characteristics of each medication that could be a barrier to home infusion were identified. These included route and duration of administration, vesicant status, emetogenic potential, and duration of stability at room temperature. Scoring was determined by a multi-disciplinary team of pharmacists and oncologists (see Table). Higher scores indicated greater potential for home administration. Results: We reviewed 100 medications. The highest possible score was 8; the lowest possible score was -4. Agents ranged with scores from 8 (fulvestrant) to -1 (dactinomycin), with a median score of 4. The mode score was 3 (24 medications). The largest factor lowering the ease of administration score was stability at room temperature; score of -2 and -1 in 19 and 18 medications respectively. Conclusions: It is feasible to administer the majority of our chemotherapeutic agents in the home setting. The biggest barrier to administration at home is stability of medications at room temperature. This issue can be addressed by transporting and storing the medication in a refrigerated container. Expectedly, injectable drugs and medications with short infusion times that are stable at room temperature would be the easiest to administer in the home. Further analysis in ongoing to assess the financial feasibility and establishment of our home based program. [Table: see text]

Aprepitant in weekly cisplatin with radiation in head and neck cancer: Is it required?

e24122 Background: Weekly cisplatin below 50 mg/m2 has lower emetogenic potential than 100 mg/m2 3weekly regimen. There is limited data on the utility of Aprepitant with weekly cisplatin used in radiation in head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC). Methods: We conducted a phase 3 randomized trial in locally advanced HNSCC patients who were treated with definitive chemoradiation either with cisplatin or cisplatin-nimotuzumab. 5HT3 inhibitor and steroids +/- aprepitant were used as antiemetic prophylaxis as per physician discretion. The current analysis is focussed on studying the impact of aprepitant on nausea and vomiting. Fischer’s exact test was used to compare the chemotherapy induced nausea vomiting (CINV) rates between aprepitant and non-aprepitant groups. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the odds of CINV with the use of aprepitant. Results: Data on CINV is available for 524/536 patients. Nausea was present in 251 (47.9%) patients while vomiting was seen in 155 (29.6%) patients. Aprepitant, 5HT3 antagonist and dexamethasone were administered to 265 (50.86%), while 256 received 5HT3 antagonist and dexamethasone. Among patients receiving aprepitant, nausea was present in 112 (42.3%), while there was no nausea in 153 (57.7%) patients (p = 0.011). Vomiting with aprepitant was seen in 71 (26.8%) patients while 194 (73.2%) had no vomiting (p = 0.151). Adjusted odds ratio for use of aprepitant containing antiemetic prophylaxis in prevention of CINV were 1.585 (1.116-2.249;p = 0.010) and 1.328 (0.904-1.951;p = 0.149) as depicted in the table. Conclusions: Use of aprepitant significantly decreases nausea and is needed for weekly cisplatin regimens used in radiation in head and neck cancers. [Table: see text]

Expert Consensus on Effective Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: An Indian Perspective.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most common and feared side effects in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Scientific evidence proves its detrimental impact on a patient's quality of life (QoL), treatment compliance, and overall healthcare cost. Despite the CINV-management landscape witnessing a radical shift with the introduction of novel, receptor-targeting antiemetic agents, this side effect remains a chink in the armor of a treating oncologist. Though global guidelines acknowledge patient-specific risk factors and chemotherapeutic agent emetogenic potential in CINV control, a “one-fit-for-all” approach cannot be followed across all geographies. Hence, in a pioneering attempt, India-based oncologists conveyed easily implementable, region-specific, consensus-based statements on CINV prevention and management. These statements resulted from integrating the analysis of scientific evidence and guidelines on CINV by the experts, with their clinical experience. The statements will strengthen decision-making abilities of Indian oncologists/clinicians and help in achieving consistency in CINV prevention and management in the country. Furthermore, this document shall lay the foundation for developing robust Indian guidelines for CINV prevention and control.

Evaluation of pre-chemotherapy antiemetic prescriptions in a hospital unit

Introduction: Antineoplastic drugs, due to their high toxicity, can lead to adverse reactions to drugs, such as emesis, which causes discomfort to the patient. These drugs can be classified according to emetogenic potential and have appropriate treatment protocols. Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate whether there is compliance between antiemetic prescription in patients receiving antineoplastic treatment in a hospital unit, according to pre-established emesis prevention protocols. Methods: This is a cross-sectional retrospective study of chemotherapy prescriptions analysis from January to April 2017. Data were analyzed according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2017 Acute Emesis Prevention Protocol. Nonconformities were classified in: wrong medicine; wrong dose; wrong administration frequency and wrong administration route. Results: Of the 919 prescriptions analyzed, 83% did not comply with the protocol. The most common nonconformity found in the study was the wrong dose with the most prevalent scenario being the dexamethasone dose above the required dose. Conclusion: Most of the prescriptions analyzed did not comply with the pre-established protocol. This increases the likelihood of adverse drug reactions, does not effectively prevent emesis, thereby increasing patient weakness, decreasing quality of life, and wasting resources.

Effect of ginger tea on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients in selected hospitals, Bhubaneswar, Odisha

A quasi-experimental research study (posttest only research design) was conducted to evaluate the effect of ginger tea on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients in selected hospitals of Bhubaneswar and to find out the association of level of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with selected socio-demographic variables. For this study, a quantitative experimental approach and post-test only research design was adopted. 100 patients were selected by convenience sampling technique and categorized into experimental (n=50) and control group (n=50) for this study. Self- structured socio-demographic proforma and self- structured record analysis proforma was used to collect socio-demographic data and modified nausea and vomiting scale was used to measure the level of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients. The data was analyzed by using SPSS version 20.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Science). The post-testt level of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among experimental and control groups was compared by unpaired‘t’ test and the result showed (p=&lt;0.0001) significant difference between both groups. The chi-square analysis shows a statistically significance association between chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and the emetogenic potential of the drug in both groups and in control group age was also significance associated. The ANOVA test revealed the statistically significance of the posttest level of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting within groups of the emetogenic potential of a drug. The present study concluded that the food component, like ginger tea, is an effective home remedy for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients. Further study can be conducted with a large population, different dose and compositions of ginger and with different adjuvant therapy to manage nausea and vomiting among cancer patients.